Skip to main content

Full text of "Acta conventus neo-latini Guelpherbytani : proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Neo-Latin Studies : Wolfenbüttel 12 August to 16 August 1985"

See other formats 


ACTA  CONVENTUS 
NEO-LATINI  GUELPHERBYTANI 


roedfeoal  8c  Renaissance 
texts  &  stadfes 


Volume  53 


ACTA  CONVENTUS 
NEO-LATINI  GUELPHERBYTANI 


Proceedings  of  the  Sixth  International  Congress 
of  Neo-Latin  Studies 


Wolfenbiittel  12  August  to  16  August  1985 


EDITED  BY 

Stella  P.  Revard 

Fidel  Radle 
Mario  A.Di  Cesare 


FTjedieoal  8c  Renaissance  texts  8c  stadfes 

Binghamton,  New  York 
1988 


A  generous  grant  from  Pegasus  Limited  for  the  Advancement 
of  Neo-Latin  Studies  has  helped  meet  publication  costs  of  this  book. 


©  Copyright  1988 

Center  for  Medieval  &  Early  Renaissance  Studies 
State  University  of  New  York  at  Binghamton 


Library  of  Congress  Cataloging  in  Publication  Data 

International  Congress  of  Neo-Latin  Studies  (6th  :  1985  : 
Wolfenbiittel,  Germany) 

Acta  conventus  neo-latini  Guelpherbytani  :  proceedings  of  the 
Sixth  International  Congress  of  Neo-Latin  Studies  :  Wolfenbiit- 
tel, August  1985  /  edited  by  Stella  Revard,  Fidel  Radle,  Mario 
A.  Di  Cesare. 

p.  cm.   —  (Medieval  &  Renaissance  texts  &  studies  :  v.  53) 
1 .  Latin  literature,  Medieval  and  modern  —  History  and  criticism  — 

Congresses.     2.  Latin  philology.  Medieval  and  modern  — Congresses. 

3.  Leamingandscholarship  — History  — Congresses.     4.  Civilization, 

Medieval  — Congresses.     5.  Renaissance  — Congresses.     6.  Classicism 

—  Congresses.     7.  Humanists  — Congresses.     I.  Revard,  Stella  Puree. 

II.  Radle,  Fidel.     III.  Di  Cesare,  Mario  A.     IV.  Title.     V.  Series. 

PA8002.I57     1985     870'.9-dcl9  88-11889 

ISBN  0-86698-037-7  (alk.  paper) 


This  book  is  made  to  last. 

It  is  set  in  Baskerville,  smythe-sewn 

and  printed  on  acid-free  paper 

to  library  specifications. 

Printed  in  the  United  States  of  America 


Contents 

Foreword  ix 

Programm  xi 

CARL  JOACHIM  CLASSEN,   BegrufiuUg  3 

1.  Humanism  and  the  Classical  Tradition 

KLAUS  ARNOLD,  Koiirad  Celtis  und  sein  Buch  iiber  Niirnberg  7 

iRENA  BACKUS,  Traductions  latines  des  Oeuvres  de  Jean 
Damascene:  editions  de  Cologne  (1546)  et  de  Bale  (1548). 
Presentation  du  contenu  et  etude  des  deux  traductions  du  "De 
duabus  Christi  voluntatibus"  17 

PAUL  M.  CLOGAN,  Lactantius  Placidus'  Commentary  on  the  Thebaid  25 

STEPHAN  FUSSEL,  "Quo  me  Phocbe  rapis  ..."  Uberlegungen  zum 

Dichterselbstverstandnis  im  italienischen  Spathumanismus  33 

JULIA  HAiG  OAissER,  The  CatuUan  Lectures  of  Pierius  Valerianus  45 

EDWARD  V.  GEORGE,  The  Sullau  Declamations:  Vives'  Intentions  55 

ELLEN  s.  GINSBERG,  Marc-Antoine  de  Muret:  A  Re-Evaluation  63 

ROGER  GREEN,  Horacc's  Odcs  in  the  Psalm  Paraphrases  of 

Buchanan  71 

MARION  L.  KUNTZ,  The  Commentary  of  Guillaume  Postel  on  the 
Sibylline  Verses  of  Vergil:  An  Example  of  a  Renaissance  Read- 
ing of  the  Classics  81 
ANDREW  M.  MCLEAN,  Thomas  Morc's  Utopia  as  Dialogue  and  City 

Encomium  91 

JOHN  MULRYAN,  The  Lectionum  Antiquarum  of  Ludovicus  Caelius 

and  the  Italian  Mythographers  99 

COLETTE  NATivEL,  Lc  De  pictura  ueterum  de  Franciscus  Junius:  Le 

Musee  Imaginaire  d'un  Philologue  107 


KARL  AUGUST  NEUHAUSEN,  Dc  Mcrcurio  renascciitibus  obvio  litteris  117 

HANS-GERT  ROLOFF,  Zu  Thomas  Naogcorgs  Satiren  127 

R.  J.  SCHOECK,  On  the  Editing  of  Classical  Texts  before  Vinet: 

Early  Printed  Editions  of  Ausonius  before  1580  137 

jERZY  STARNAWSKi,  Ein  unbekanntcs  Jesuitendrama  iiber  loannes 

Dantiscus  aus  dem  18.  Jahrhundert  145 

LASZLO  szORENYi,  Neulateinische  lyrische  Dichtung  im  Ungarn 

des  18.  Jahrhunderts  und  die  antike  Tradition  153 

JOHN  WALL,  The  Dramaturgy  of  Buchanan's  Tragedies  163 

GERHiLD  SCHOLZ  WILLIAMS,  Vergil  in  Wien:  Bartholinis  Austriados 

Libri  XII  und  Jakob  Spiegels  Kommentar  171 

DIETER  wuTTKE,  Bcobachtungcn  zum  Verhaltnis  von 

Humanismus  und  Naturwissenschaft  im  deutschsprachigen 

Raum  181 


2.  History  and  History  of  Science 

VIRGINIA  WOODS  CALLAHAN,  Andrcas  Alciatus  and  Boniface 

Amerbach:  The  Chronicle  of  a  Renaissance  Friendship  193 

CHRIS  L.  HEESAKKERS,  Nculateinischc  Geschichtsschreibung  im 

hoUandischen  Humanismus  des  16.  Jahrhunderts  201 

JOHANNES  IRMSCHER,  Die  Stcllung  dcr  neulateinischen  Studien  im 

philologisch-historischen  Wissenschaftssystem  211 

HOWARD  JONES,  Gassendi's  Defence  of  Galileo:  The  Politics  of 

Discretion  221 

LEO  MILLER,  Hermann  Mylius'  Baroque  Letters  to  Milton  and 

Weckherlin  233 


3.  Literature 

Plenary  Lecture  cesare  vasoli,  Linguaggio,  poesia  e  "maraviglia" 

negli  scritti  di  Francesco  Patrizi  243 

ARTHUR  eyffinger,  Grotius'  Drama  on  Joseph  in  Egypt  in  the 

Tradition  of  the  Theme  261 
MINNA  SKAFTE  JENSEN,  Latin  Bucolic  Poctry  in  16th  Century 

Denmark  269 
CLARENCE  H.  MILLER,  Styles  and  Mixed  Genres  in  Erasmus'  Praise 

of  Folly  277 

FIDEL  RADLE,  Einigc  Bcmcrkungcn  zu  Frischlins  Dramatik  289 

LAWRENCE  V.  RYAN,  Baldassarc  Castiglione  as  a  Latin  Poet  299 

PAUL  GERHARD  SCHMIDT,  Euricius  Cordus  307 


PEGGY  MUNOz  siMONDS,  Somc  Images  of  the  Conscience  in 

Emblem  Literature  315 

MALCOLM  c.  SMITH,  Latin  Translations  of  Ronsard  331 

ALAN  sooNS,  Lc  "Dc  matriti  sordibus"  de  Juan  de  Iriarte 

(1702-1771)  et  les  courants  d'idees  de  son  epoque  339 

THOMAS  THOMSON,  The  Latin  Psalm  Paraphrases  of  Theodore  de 

Beze  353 

FRiEDRiCH-K.  UNTERWEG,  Thomas  Morus,  Tragoedia  365 

HARRY  VREDEVELD,  The  BucoHcou  of  Eobanus  Hessus:  Three 

Versions  of  Pastoral  375 

HERMANN  wiEGAND,  Manamschc  Liebeskunst:  Zu  den  Anfangen 

der  Lateinischen  Lyrik  des  Johannes  Bisselius  SJ.  (1601-1682)  383 

FRANCIS  E.  ZAPATKA,  Prosc  Apothcgms  into  Rime  Royal:  Thomas 

More's  Translation  of  Pico  della  Mirandola's  "Twelve  Rules"  395 

Seminar  on  Didactic  Poetry 

HEINZ  HOFMANN,  Das  Nculatcinische  Lehrgedicht  401 

BERND  EFFE,  Die  Funktioncn  narrativ-fiktionaler  Digressionen  im 

antiken  Lehrgedicht  403 

F.  AKKERMAN,  Auf  dcr  Suchc  nach  dem  Lehrgedicht  in  einigen 

neulateinischen  Poetiken  409 

GEORG  ROELLENBLECK,  Erzahlcn  und  Beschreiben  im 

neulateinischen  Lehrgedicht  419 

MARIO  A.  Di  CESARE,  The  Scacchia  Indus  of  Marco  Girolamo  Vida: 

The  Didactic  Poem  as  Fictional  Text  425 

HEINZ  HOFMANN,  Zusammcnfassung  der  Referate  und  Einleitung 

zur  Diskussion  433 


4.   Rhetoric  and  Linguistics  (including  Philology 
and  Epistolography) 

Plenary  Lecture  jean-claude  margolin.  La  bataille  des  "latiniseurs" 
et  des  "helleniseurs"  au  XVIIe  siecle  a  propos  du  P.  Philippe 
Labbe  et  du  Jardin  des  Racines  Grecques  437 

lise  bek,  Thomas  More  on  the  Double  Portrait  of  Erasmus  and 

Pierre  Gillis:  Humanist  Rhetoric  or  Renaissance  Art  Theory?  469 

GUNTER  BERGER,  Rhctorik  und  Leserlenkung  in  der 

Aithiopika-Epitome  des  Martin  Crusius  481 

MARIE-MADELEINE  DE  LA  GARANDERiE,  Un  Vrai  Diailogue:  Lc  De 

Philologia  de  Guillaume  Bude  491 

HUBERTUS  scHULTE  HERBRUGGEN,  Artes  dictandi  und  erasmische 

Theorie  in  More's  lateinischen  Briefen  503 


KRiSTiAN  JENSEN,  The  Latin  Grammar  of  Philipp  Melanchthon  513 

JAMES  J.  MURPHY,  Ciccronian  Influences  in  Latin  Rhetorical 

Compendia  of  the  15th  Century  521 

DAVID  PRICE,  Nicodemus  Frischlin's  Rhetoric  531 

PAUL  R.  SELLiN,  The  Proper  Translation  of  constitutio  in  Daniel 

Heinsius'  De  tragoediae  constitutione  and  Some  Implications  of  the 

Word  for  Seventeenth-Century  Literary  Theory  541 

FRANCESCO  TATEO,  La  raccolta  delle  epistole  di  Antonio  De 

Ferrariis  Galateo  551 

5.  Philosophy  /  Law  /  Theology 

UWE  BAUMANN,  Logischc  Excmpla  und  ihre  Funktion  in  der 

Responsio  ad  Lutherum  des  Thomas  Morus  563 

PAUL  RICHARD  BLUM,  Scicncc  and  Scholasticism  in  Melchior 

Cornaeus  SJ  573 

AUGUST  BUCK,  Ubcrlegungen  zur  moralistischen  Literatur  des 

italienischen  Renaissance-Humanismus  581 

JACQUES  CHOMARAT,  Fausto  Sozzini  source  du  Pari  de  Pascal?  597 

ROBERT  GINSBERG,  Strategy  and  Principle  in  John  Locke's  Epistola 

de  Tolerantia  609 

ARNOLD  L.  KERSON,  Enlightened  Thought  in  Diego  Jose  Abad's  De 

Deo,  Deoque  Homine  Heroica  617 

PAUL  GRiMLEY  KUNTZ,  Lcibniz's  Theory  of  Order  625 

THOMAS  LOSONCY,  Philosophical  Notions  of  Certitude  and  Identity 

in  Leibniz  635 

BARBARA  MARX,  "Propositio  vcl  inaudita  et  modis  omnibus  ab- 

surda"  Humanistische  Philologie,  Bibelexegese  und  utopische 

Literatur  641 

c.  MATHEEussEN,  Das  Ringcn  des  J.  L.  Vives  um  eine 

humanistische  Bildung:  1514-1519  653 

ELIZABETH  MGCUTCHEON,  Margaret  More  Roper's  Translation  of 

Erasmus'  Precatio  Dominica  659 

PHILLIPS  SALMAN,  Mazzoni  and  Bacon:  The  Mind  and  Natural 

Philosophy  667 

ROGER  T.  siMONDS,  "Truc  Philosophy"  in  the  Continental  Legal 

Tradition  675 

Index  683 


Foreword 


The  sixth  triennial  Congress  of  the  International  Association  for  Neo-Latin 
Studies  took  place  August  12-17,  1985,  at  the  Herzog  August  Bibliothek,  Wol- 
fenbiittel.  Under  the  able  chairmanship  of  Professor  Walther  Ludwig  of  the 
University  of  Hamburg,  and  thanks  also  to  the  gracious  hospitality  of  the  Ar- 
beitskreis  fiir  Renaissanceforschung  and  officials  of  the  Library,  the  Congress 
was  a  great  success. 

With  this  volume,  the  lANLS  Publications  Committee  chaired  by  Professor 
Richard  Schoeck  has  broken  with  the  previous  custom  of  burdening  the  or- 
ganizer of  the  Congress  with  the  task  of  editing  the  entire  volume  of  Acta.  In- 
stead, at  the  Sixth  Congress,  the  Association  agreed  to  the  proposition  that 
an  editorial  team  should  share  the  burden.  It  is  worth  recording  here  that  Pro- 
fessor Stella  Revard,  accepting  the  responsibility  for  the  English-language  pa- 
pers, had  obviously  the  largest  share  of  work;  and  that  Professor  Fidel  Radle 
had  charge  of  all  the  German-language  papers.  The  publisher  acted  as  coor- 
dinating editor,  assuming  responsibility  for  the  remaining  papers  and  for  nu- 
merous other  aspects  of  publication.  The  papers  in  this  volume,  however,  have 
been  organized  by  subjects  (and  alphabetically  within  these  categories),  gen- 
erally following  the  Association's  own  taxonomy  set  forth  at  the  business  meet- 
ing in  Wolfenbiittel. 

Inevitably,  some  inconsistencies  remain.  We  have  not  attempted  to  regu- 
larize all  documentation,  insisting  only  that  there  be  consistency  and  a  kind 
of  logic  in  individual  papers  or  groups.  Given  the  size  and  variety  of  this  vol- 
ume, we  have  been  similarly  accommodating  to  varieties  of  indexing  proce- 
dures; the  coordinating  editor  accepts  responsibility  for  whatever  problems 
may  have  arisen  thanks  to  our  ambitious  attempt  to  create  a  full  index  nominum. 

MARIO  A.    DI  CESARE 

FIDEL  RADLE 

STELLA  P.    REVARD 


Programm 


Organisations komitee  des  Kongresses 

Prof.  Dr.  Dietrich  Briesemeister,  Mainz,  Treasurer 

Prof.  Dr.  August  Buck,  Marburg,  Vorsitzender  des  Wolfenbiitteler  Arbeitskreises  fiir 

Renaissanceforschung,  Gastmitglied 
Mr.  Roger  P.  H.  Green,  St.  Andrews,  Secretary 
Prof.  Dr.  Walther  Ludwig,  Hamburg,  Second  Vice  President,  Vorsitzender  des  Or- 

gginisationskomitees 
Prof.  Dr.  Alain  Michel,  Paris,  President 
Prof.  Dr.  Lawrence  V.  Ryan,  Stanford,  First  Vice  President 
Prof.  Dr.  Richard  Schoeck,  Boulder,  Chairman  of  Publications  Committee 
Priv.-Doz.  Dr.  Walter  Spam,  Herzog  August  Bibliothek  Wolfenbiittel,  Stellvertretender 

Leiter  des  Bereichs  Forschung  und  Kultur,  Oast 

Vortrags-  und  Seminarrdume 

Der  Kongrefi  fmdet  in  den  Raumen  der  Herzog  August  Bibliothek  in  Wolfenbiittel 
statt.  Im  Programm  gebrauchte  Abkiirzungen: 

Raum  A  =  Augusteerhalle,  Bibliotheca  Augusta 

Raum  B   =   Bibelsaal,  Bibliotheca  Augusta 

Raum  C   =  Grofier  Seminarraum,  Zeughaus 

Raum  D  =   Kleiner  Seminarraum,  Zeughaus 

Raum  E  =   Saal  des  Anna  Vorwerk-Hauses 
Fiir  die  Titel,  Adressen  und  Universitatsaffiliationen  der  Referenten  und  der  Diskus- 
sionsleiter  ist  das  Teilnehmerverzeichnis  des  Kongresses  zu  vergleichen.  Die  Namen 
der  Vorsitzenden  der  einzelnen  Veranstaltungen  sind  mit  der  Abkiirzung  'V  bezeichnet. 

Montag,  12.  August  1985 

9.15-11.00  Uhr 

Raum  A  Eroffnung  des  Kongresses  durch  den  Prasidenten  der  Internationad 

Association  for  Neo-Latin  Studies 


XII  •  PROGRAMM 

Grufiworte 

des  Direktors  der  Herzog  August  Bibliothek  Wolfenbiittel,  Prof. 
Dr.  Paul  Raabe 

des  Resident  Fellow  der  Herzog  August  Bibliothek  Wolfenbiittel, 
Prof.  Dr.  Peter  Ganz 

des  Ersten  Vorsitzenden  der  Mommsen-Gesellschaft  des  Ver- 
bandes  der  deutschen  Forscher  auf  dem  Gebiet  des  griechisch- 
romischen  Altertums,  Prof.  Dr.  Carl  Joachim  Classen 

Begriifiung  durch  den  Vorsitzenden  des  Organisationskomitees 

Eroffnungsvortrag:  A.  Buck,  Uberlegungen  zur  moralistichen  Liter- 
atur  des  italienischen  Renaissance-Humanismus;  V:  W.  Ludwig 

14.00-14.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I  L.  V.  Ryan,  Baldassare  Castiglione  as  a  Latin  Poet; 

Raum  A  V:  I.  Kajanto 

Sektion  II        G.  M.  Logan,  Utopia  and  Political  Oratory; 
Raum  B  V:  C.  J.  Classen 

Sektion  III      G.  Marc'hadour,  Pontifex  and  Sacerdos  in  Erasmus,  Fisher,  and 
Raum  C  More;  V:  C.  M.  Murphy 

Sektion  IV       F.  Tateo,  La  raccolta  delle  Epistole  di  Antonio  De  Ferrariis  Galateo 
Raum  D 

15.00-16.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I         J.  Irmscher,  Die  Stellung  der  neulateinischen  Studien  im 
Raum  A  philologisch-historischen  Wissenschaftssystem 

J.  IJsewijn,  Bemerkungen  zum  neuen  Companion  to  Neo-Latin  Litera- 
ture: Erfahrungen  und  Probleme 

15.00-15.50  Uhr 

Sektion  II        M.  M.  de  La  Garanderie,  Un  vrai  dialogue:  le  De  philologia  de  Guil- 
Raum  B  laume  Bude;  V:  J.  Chomarat 

Sektion  III      U.  Baumann,  Logical  Problems  in  yior^s  Responsio  ad  Lutherum; 
Raum  C  V:  C.  M.  Murphy 

Sektion  IV      H.  B.  Norland,  Dramatic  Theory  in  the  Terentian  Commentaries; 
Raum  D  V:  A.  R.  Baca 

16.00-16.50  Uhr 

Sektion  III      F.  E.  Zapatka,  Prose  Apophthegms  into  Rhyme  Roy2il:  Thomas 
Raum  C  More's  Translation  of  Pico  della  Mirandola's  Twelve  Rules; 

V:  C.  M.  Murphy 

Sektion  IV      P.  R.  Sellin,  The  proper  Translation  of  constitutio  in  Daniel  Hein- 
Raum  D  sius'  De  tragoediae  constitutione  and  the  Implications  of  the  Word  for 

Seventeenth-Century  Literary  Theory;  V:  A.  R.  Baca 


PROGRAMM  XIII 


17.00-17.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I  A.  Mazzocco,  Antiquarian  Trends  in  Medieval  and  Renaissance 

Raum  A  Europe;  V:  J.  IJsewijn 

Sektion  IV      C.  C.  Schlam,  Celio  Calcagnini's  De  imitaiione;  V:  A.  R.  Baca 
Raum  D 

Abends:  Geselliges  Beisammensein  im  Leibniz-Haus-Restaurant  oder  anderen 

Restaurants  der  Stadt 


Dienstag,  13.  August  1985 
9.00-9.50  Uhr 

Raum  A  J-  C.  Margolin,  La  bataille  des  "latiniseurs"  et  des  "helleniseurs"  au 

XVir  siecle  (A  propos  du  P.  Labbe  et  du  Jardin  des  racines 
grecques);  V:  A.  Michel 

10.00-12.00  Uhr 

Raum  A  Seminar:  Vom  Manuskript  zum  Buch;  V:  F.  R.  Hausmann 

Referate: 

R.  J.  Schoeck,  The  First  Half-Century  of  the  Printing  and  Editing 
of  Ausonius:  The  Principles  and  Achievements  before  Vinet 

M.  E.  Milham,  Between  Manuscript  and  Book:  The  Textual  Gap 

D.  Wuttke,  Handschriftliche  Biicher  deutscher  Humanisten.  Conrad 
Celtis  und  Pangratz  Bernhaupt 

M.  C.  Woods,  Commentaries  to  the  Poetria  nova  of  Geoffroi  de  Vin- 
sauf 

10.00-10.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I         E.  J.  Polak,  The  Ars  dictandi  after  1300;  V:  J.  J.  Murphy 
Raum  B 

Sektion  II  C.  H.  Miller,  Der  Stil  dcr  Moria  des  Erasmus;  V:  G.  Marc'hadour 
Raum  C 

Sektion  III  J.  Starnawski,  Jesuitendramen  iiber  Johannes  Dantiscus  aus  dem 
Raum  D  18.  Jahrhundert 

11.00-11.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I         J.  Lindhardt,  Ars  dictaminis  —  The  Change  from  Oral  to  Literary 
Raum  B  Rhetoric;  V:  J.  J,  Murphy 

Sektion  II        K.  J.  Wilson,  The  De  consolatione  philosophiae  of  Boethius  and  Mere's 
Raum  C  Dialogue  of  Comfort]  V:  G.  Marc'hadour 

Sektion  III      H.  Wiegand,  Johannes  Bisselius,  S.J.,  und  seine  lateinische  Lyrik 
Raum  D 


XIV 


PROGRAMM 


14.00-14.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I  K.  A,  Neuhausen,  De  Mercurio  renascentibus  obvio  litteris;  V:  J. 

Raum  A  IJsewijn 

Sektion  II        M.  L.  Kuntz,  Guillaume  Postel's  Commentary  on  Vergil's  Messianic 
Raum  B  Eclogue;  V:  P.  Salman 

Sektion  III      H.  Schulte  Herbriiggen,  Artes  dictandi  and  Erasmian  Theory  in 
Raum  C  More's  Latin  Letters;  V:  C.  H.  Miller 

Sektion  IV      A.  Eyffmger,  Grotius'  Drama  on  Joseph  in  Egypt  in  the  Tradition  of 
Raum  D  the  Theme;  V:  R.  T.  Simonds 

15.00-15.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I  G.  Costa,  Giovanni  Pontano  and  the  Orpheus  Myth:  Poetry  and 

Raum  A  Magic  in  the  Age  of  Humanism;  V:  G.  Tournoy 

Sektion  II        H.  Jones,  Pierre  Gassendi's  Defence  of  Galileo:  The  Politics  of  Dis- 
Raum  B  cretion;  V:  P.  Salman 

Sektion  III      E.  McCutcheon,  Margaret  More  Roper's  Translation  of  Erasmus' 
Raum  C  Precatio  Dominica;  V:  C.  H.  Miller 

Sektion  IV      M.  S.  Jensen,  Latin  Bucolic  Poetry  in  16th-Century  Denmark; 
Raum  D  V:  J.  Lindhardt 

16.00-18.00  Uhr 

Raum  B  Seminar:  Leibniz;  V:  P.  G.  Kuntz 

Referate: 

P.  G.  Kuntz,  Leibniz's  Pythagorean  Metaphysics  of  Harmony 

T.  A.  Losoncy,  Philosophical  Notions  of  Certitude  and  Identity  in 
Leibniz 

P.  Redpath,  The  Nature  of  God  and  the  Perfection  of  the  World  for 
Aquinas  and  Leibniz 

16.00-16.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I  C.  Vecce,  Sannazaro  tra  filologia  e  poesia;  V:  G.  Tournoy 

Raum  A 

Sektion  III      B.  Marx,  Bibelexegese  und  humanistische  Philologie;  V:  J.-C.  Mar- 
Raum  C  golin 

Sektion  IV      J.  Mulryan,  The  Lectionum  antiquarum  libri  of  Ludovicus  Caelius 
Raum  D  Rhodiginus  and  the  Italian  Mythographers;  V:  A.  Mazzocco 

17.00-17.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I         J-  H.  Gaisser,  The  Catullan  Lectures  of  Pierius  Valerianus; 
Raum  A  V:  G.  Tournoy 

Sektion  III      B.  M.  Hosington,  Mary  Basset's  Translation  of  More's  De  tristitia 
Raum  C  and  its  Relationship  to  Tudor  Translating  Practices;  V:  C.  H. 

Miller 


PROGRAMM  XV 

Sektion  IV      D.  Carlson,  Court  Poems  for  the  Birth  of  Prince  Arthur 
Raum  D 

18.30  Uhr       Empfang  durch  den  Direktor  der  Herzog  August  Bibhothek  im 
Zeughaus 


Mittwoch,  14.  August  1985 

9.00-9.50  Uhr 

Raum  A  C.  VasoH,  Linguaggio,  poesia  e  "maravigha"  nella  Poetica  di  Fran- 

cesco Patrizi;  V:  D.  Briesemeister 

10.00-12.00  Uhr 

Raum  C  Seminar:  Thomas  Morus  und  John  Fisher;  V:  C.  M.  Murphy 

Referate: 

H.  Holeczek,  Die  Stellungnahmen  des  Erasmus  zum  Martyrertod 
von  Thomas  Morus  und  John  Fisher 

F.  Unterweg,  Thomas  Morus  Tragoedia 

10.00-10.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I  D.  E.  Price,  The  Rhetoric  of  Praise  and  Vituperation  in  the  Literary 

Raum  A  Theory  of  Nicodemus  Frischlin;  V:  S.  Fiissel 

Sektion  II        K.  Stawecka,  "Instar  Dei  poeta"  chez  Sarbievius  et  chez  sources 
Raum  B  anciennes;  V:  J.  Starnawski 

Sektion  III      R.  T.  Simonds,  True  Philosophy  in  the  Continental  Legal  Tradi- 
Raum  D  tion;  V:  A.  Eyffmger 

Sektion  IV      C.  Matheeussen,  Das  Ringen  des  Juan  Luis  Vives  um  eine  huma- 
Raum  E  nistische  Bildung:  1514-1519;  V:  E.  S.  Ginsberg 

11.00-11.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I         F.  Radle,  Bemerkungen  zu  Frischlins  Dramatik;  V:  S.  Fiissel 
Raum  A 

Sektion  II        L.  Szorenyi,  Neulateinische  lyrische  Dichtung  im  Ungarn  des  18. 
Raum  B  Jahrhunderts  und  die  Tradition  der  Antike;  V:  J.  Starnawski 

Sektion  III      S.  Rowan,  The  Opera  omnia  of  a  Germsm  Jurist:  The  Reception  and 
Raum  D  Survival  of  Ulrich  Zasius;  V:  A.  Eyffmger 

Sektion  IV      E.  V.  George,  Declamation  and  Vives'  Development; 
Raum  E  V:  E.  S.  Ginsberg 

14.00-14.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I  L.  Gualdo  Rosa,  Leonardo  Bruni  et  son  public:  pour  un  census  des 

Raum  A  manuscrits  de  ses  epistolae  familiares  (paper  read  by  M.  M.  de 

La  Garanderie);  V:  M.  M.  de  La  Garanderie 


XVI 


PROGRAMM 


Sektion  II  P.  G.  Schmidt,  Euricius  Cordus;  V:  L.  W.  Forster 

Raum  B 

Sektion  III  T.  Thomson,  The  Latin  Psalm  Paraphrases  of  Theodore  de  Beze; 

Raum  C  V:  C.  A.  Soons 

Sektion  IV  J-  R.  Clark,  Roger  Bacon  and  Marsillo  Ficino's  De  vita  longa; 

Raum  D  V:  P.  G.  Kuntz 

15.00-15.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I  M.  C.  Smith,  Latin  Translations  of  Ronsard;  V:  M.  M.  de  La 

Raum  A  Garanderie 

Sektion  II  H.  Vredeveld,  The  Bucolicon  of  Eobanus  Hessus:  Three  Versions  of 

Raum  B  Pastoral;  V:  L.  W.  Forster 

Sektion  III  E.  S.  Ginsberg,  Marc-Antoine  de  Muret:  A  Reevaluation; 

Raum  C  V:  C.  A.  Soons 

Sektion  IV  P.  Salman,  Mazzoni  and  Bacon,  the  Mind  and  Natural  Philosophy; 

Raum  D  V:  P.  G.  Kuntz 

16.00-16.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I  J.  Chomarat,  Fausto  Sozzini,  source  du  Pari  de  Pascal?; 

Raum  A  V:  M.  M.  de  La  Garanderie 

Sektion  II  H.  G.  Roloff,  Thomas  Naogeorgs  Satiren;  V:  L.  W.  Forster 

Raum  B 

Sektion  III  A.  L.  Kerson,  Enlightened  Thought  in  Diego  Jose  Abad's 

Raum  C  (1727-1779)  De  Deo,  Deoque  Homine  Heroica;  V:  T.  Thomson 

Sektion  IV  R.  Ginsberg,  Strategy  and  Principle  in  John  Locke's  Epistola  de  tole- 

Raum  D  rantia;  V:  P.  G.  Kuntz 

17.00-17.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I  C.  Nativel,  Le  De  pictura  veterum  de  Franciscus  Junius  (1589-1677); 

Raum  A  V:  M.  M.  de  La  Garanderie 

Sektion  II  W.  Kiihlmann,  Poetische  Sinnlichkeit  im  eisernen  Zeitalter 

Raum  B  —  Dichtung  im  Zeichen  Anacreons  bei  den  deutschen  Neulateinern 

um  1600;  V:  L.  W.  Forster 

Sektion  III  C.  A.  Soons,  The  Latin  Poetry  of  Juan  de  Iriarte  (Tenerife 
Raum  C  1702-Madrid  1771);  V:  T.  Thomson 

Sektion  IV  P.  R.  Blum,  Melchior  Cornaeus  zwischen  Scholastik  und  Natur- 
Raum  D  wissenschaft:  Ein  jesuitisches  Lehrbuch  der  Philosophic  (1657); 

V:  P.  G.  Kuntz 


Donnerstag,  15.  August  1985 
9.00-9.50  Uhr 

Raum  A  B.  Vickers,  Valla's  Ambivalent  Praise  of  Pleasure:  Rhetoric  Serving 

Christianity;  V:  L.  Ryan 


PROGRAMM 


XVII 


10.00-12.00 
Raum  B 


Uhr 


Seminar:  Cicero  and  Neo-Latin  Rhetoric;  V:  J.  J.  Murphy 

Referate: 

J.  J.  Murphy,  Ciceronian  Influences  in  Latin  Rhetorical  Compendia 
of  the  15th  Century 

J.  S.  Freedman,  Cicero  in  16th-  and  17th-Century  Rhetoric  Instruc- 
tion 

J.  R.  Henderson,  The  Triumph  of  Ciceronianism  in  Renaissance 
Epistolography 

10.00-10.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I         J-  V.  Mehl,  Hermann  von  dem  Busche's  Vallum  humanitatis  (1518): 
Raum  A  A  German  Defence  of  the  Renaissance  studia  humanitatis; 

V:  W.  Kuhlmann 

Sektion  III      G.  Scholz-Williams,  Vergil  in  Wien:  Bartolinis  Austriados  libri  XII 
Raum  D  and  Jakob  Spiegels  Kommentar;  V:  F.  Radle 

11.00-11.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I         D.  Wuttke,  Humanismus  und  Naturwissenschaft  im  deutschen 
Raum  A  Sprachgebiet;  V:  W.  Kuhlmann 

Sektion  II       J.  A.  Parente,  The  Bombastic  Decline  of  Biblical  Tragedy:  The 
Raum  C  Dramas  of  Lummenaeus  a  Marca  (1570-1629);  V:  M.  A.  Di 

Cesare 

Sektion  III      S.  Fiissel,  Quo  me  Phoebe  rapis  .  .  .  —  Dichterselbstverstandnis  in  den 
Raum  D  Werken  des  Riccardus  Bartholinus  Perusinus  (1475-1529); 

V:  F.  Radle 

14.00-14.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I         L.  W.  Forster,  Lessing  und  das  Neulatein;  V:  W.  Ludwig 
Raum  A 

Sektion  II        I.  Kajanto,  On  imitatio  as  a  Principle  of  Renaissance  Epigraphy; 
Raum  B  V:  F.  Tateo 

Sektion  III      A.  M.  McClean,  More's  Utopia  as  a  Dialogic  City  Encomium  (paper 
Raum  C  read  by  R.  Schoeck);  V:  C.  M.  Murphy 

Sektion  IV      M.  Mund-Dopchie,  Apport  et  influence  des  Historiae  poetarum  tam 
Raum  D  graecorum  quam  latinorum  dtalogi  decem  de  Lilio  Giraldi;  V:  I.  Backus 

Sektion  V        C.  L.  Heesakkers,  Neulateinische  Geschichtsschreibung  im  hoUan- 
Raum  E  dischen  Humanismus  des  16.  Jzihrhunderts  (paper  not  read  but 

submitted  to  the  Congress);  V:  P.  R.  Sellin 

15.00-17.00  Uhr 

Raum  A  Business  Meeting  of  the  Association;  V:  A.  Michel 


XVIII  ,  PROGRAMM 


19.00-20.00  Uhr 

Raum  A  Offentlicher  Vortrag:  C.  J.  Classen,  Cicero  orator  inter  Germanos 

redivivus 


Anschliefiend  Bibliotheksfiihrungen 


Freitag,  16.  August  1985 
9.00-9.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I         J.  B.  Dillon,  The  Latin  Verse  of  Abraham  Cowley  (1618-1667); 
Raum  A  V:  C.  Revard 

Sektion  II        M.  C.  Woods,  Renaissance  Attitudes  toward  a  Medieval  Art  of 
Raum  B  Poetry:  Reactions  to  the  Poetria  nova  in  the  Sixteenth  and  Seven- 

teenth Centuries;  V:  C.J.  Classen 

Sektion  III      W.  Lackner,  Erasmus  von  Rotterdam  als  Editor  und  Ubersetzer  des 
Raum  C  Johannes  Chrysostomos;  V:  J.-C.  Margolin 

Sektion  IV      R.  P.  H.  Green,  Horace's  Odes  in  the  Psalm  Paraphrases  of 
Raum  E  Buchanan;  V:  I.  D.  McFarlane 

10.00-12.00  Uhr 

Raum  B  Seminar:  Neulateinisches  Lehrgedicht;  V:  H.  Hofmann 

Referate: 

B.  Effe,  Die  Funktionen  narrativ-fiktionaler  Digressionen  im  antiken 
Lehrgedicht 

F.  Akkerman,  Das  Lehrgedicht  in  einigen  neulateinischen  Poetiken 

G.  Roellenbleck,  Beschreiben  und  Erzahlen  im  neulateinischen 
Lehrgedicht 

M.  A.  Di  Cesare,  Vida's  Scacchia  Indus:  The  Didactic  Poem  as 
Fictional  Text 

10.00-10.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I  S.  P.  Revard,  The  Greek  Anthology  and  the  Latin  Poems  of 

Raum  A  Andrew  Marvell;  V:  C.  Revard 

Sektion  III      I.  Backus,  Les  traductions  latines  des  oeuvres  de  Jean  Damascene: 
Raum  C  editions  de  Cologne  (1546);  V:  J.-C.  Margolin 

Sektion  IV      P.  C.  Dust,  A  Translation  of  Buchanan's  Baptistes:  Is  it  John 
Raum  E  Milton's?  V:  I.  D.  McFarlane 

11.00-11.50  Uhr 

Sektion  I         J.  P.  Carley,  John  Leland's  Encomiastic  Verse:  The  Unpublished 
Raum  A  Remains;  V:  C.  Revard 

Sektion  III      P.  M.  Clogan,  The  Praise  of  the  City  of  Thebes;  V:  P.  G.  Schmidt 
Raum  C 


PROGRAMM 


XIX 


Sektion  IV 
Raum  E 

14.00-14.50 
Sektion  I 
Raum  A 

Sektion  II 
Raum  B 
Sektion  III 
Raum  C 
Sektion  IV 
Raum  D 

15.00-15.50 
Sektion  I 
Raum  A 
Sektion  II 
Raum  B 
Sektion  III 
Raum  C 
Sektion  IV 
Raum  D 

16.00-16.50 
Sektion  I 
Raum  A 
Sektion  II 
Raum  B 
Sektion  III 
Raum  D 
Sektion  IV 
Raum  C 

17.00-17.50 

Sektion  I 
Raum  A 

Sektion  III 
Raum  C 

18.00  Uhr 

Raum  A 
Raum  A 

20.00  Uhr 


J.  Wall,  Tragic  Heroism  in  the  Plays  of  George  Buchanan 
(1506-1582);  V:  I.  D.  McFarlane 

Uhr 
M.  Lentzen,  Die  Verherrlichung  Mailands  im  Quattrocento.  Zu  Pier 

Candido  Decembrios  De  laudibus  Medio lanensium  urbis  in  comparatio- 

nem  Florentiae  panegyricus;  V:  P.  G.  Schmidt 
K.  Jensen,  The  Latin  Grammar  of  Philip  Melanchthon 

B.  G.  Kohl,  Petrarch  and  Giovanni  Conversini  da  Ravenna:  Inspi- 
ration and  Affmities;  V:  H.  L.  Eaker 

G.  Berger,  Rhetorik  und  Leserlenkung  in  der  Aithiopika- Epitome  des 
Martin  Crusius;  V:  J.  H.  Gaisser 

Uhr 
K.  Arnold,  Konrad  Celtis  und  sein  Buch  uber  Niimberg; 

V:  P.  G.  Schmidt 
R.  Keen,  The  Letter  of  Recommendation  as  an  Epistolary  Form: 

The  Example  of  Philip  Melanchthon 
L.  Piepho,  Mantuan's  Eclogues:  Newly  Discovered  Portions  of  the 

Lost  First  Edition;  V:  H.  Vredeveld 
V.  W.  Callahan,  Andreas  Alciati  and  Boniface  Amerbach  — The 

Chronicle  of  a  Renaissance  Friendship;  V:  J.  H.  Gaisser 

Uhr 
L.  Manley,  Venceslaus  Clemens,  Jan  Sictor,  Johzmnes  Adamus,  and 

the  Praise  of  Stuart  London;  V:  P.  G.  Schmidt 
L,  Miller,  The  Baroque  Neo-Latin  Letters  of  Herman  Mylius 

J.  R.  C.  Martyn,  Echo  Poems  in  Ovid  and  Renaissance  Lyric 

Poetry;  V:  H.  Vredeveld 
L.  Bek,  Thomas  More  on  the  Double  Portrait  of  Erasmus  and 

Pierre  Gilles  —  Humanist  Rhetoric  or  Renaissance  Art  Theory?; 

V:  M.  C.  Woods 

Uhr 

W.  Ludwig,  Lovatos  Versepistel  iiber  die  Dichtkunst  — das  erste 
humanistische  Manifest;  V:  A.  Buck 

P.  M.  Simonds,  Emblems  and  the  Theme  of 'Conscience'; 
V:  M.  C.  Woods 

Abschlufi  des  Kongresses 

Schlufiwort  des  Prasidenten  der  International  Association  for  Neo- 
Latin  Studies 

Abschiedsessen  im  Restaurant  Kaffeehaus,  Wolfenbiittel 


ACTA  CONVENTUS 
NEO-LATINI  GUELPHERBYTANI 


Begriifiung 
Carl  Joachim  Classen 


A  Is  erstem  Vorsitzenden  des  Verbandes  der  Forscher  auf  dem  Ge- 
biete  des  griechisch-romischen  Altertums  ist  es  mir  eine  besondere 
Freude  und  Ehre,  hier  anlafilich  der  Eroffnung  der  ersten  Tagung 
der  internationalen  Gesellschaft  fiir  neulateinische  Studien  in  der  Bundesre- 
publik  Deutschland  ein  Grufiwort  zu  sagen.  Zwar  tragt  unser  Verband  den 
Namen  "Mommsen-Gesellschaft,"  doch  befassen  sich  seine  Mitglieder  nicht  nur 
mit  der  klassischen  Antike,  und  so  haben  sie  vor  neun  Jahren  beschlossen  den 
Verbandsnamen  zu  erweitern:  die  Gesellschaft  heifit  seither  "Verband  der  For- 
scher auf  dem  Gebiete  des  griechisch-romischen  Altertums  einschliefilich  seiner 
Wirkungsgeschichte . " 

Das  Interesse  der  klassischen  Philologen  fur  die  spatere  Literatur,  die  by- 
zantinische  und  die  spatere  lateinische,  ist  alt.  Es  war  ein  Gottinger  klassi- 
scher  Philologe,  Wilhelm  Meyer  aus  Speyer,  der  dem  Mittellatein  eine 
ebenbiirtige  Stellung  verschafft  hat,  und  auch  fiir  die  neulateinische  Literatur 
haben  die  klassischen  Philologen  immer  ein  gewisses  Interesse  gezeigt  — wie 
etwa  die  Bestande  der  Gottinger  Universitatsbibliothek  zeigen,  die  fiir  lange 
Zeit  von  klassischen  Philologen  geleitet  wurde  — sie  kennt  sogar  eine  eigene 
Signatur  fiir  die  poetae  graeci  et  latini  recentiores.  Zugegebenermafien  ist  dieses 
Interesse  immer  ein  wenig  zufallig  und  sporadisch  gewesen,  nicht  systema- 
tisch,  und  es  ist  daher  vielleicht  nicht  unangebracht,  wenn  ein  klassischer  Phi- 
lologe kurz  ein  paar  grundsatzliche  Uberlegungen  zu  den  neulateinischen 
Studien  anstellt. 

Wo  sich  klassische  Philologen  fiir  das  Nachleben  der  antiken  Literatur  inter- 
essiert  haben,  sind  sie  in  der  Regel  den  Spuren  einzelner  Autoren 
nachgegangen  — Aristophanes  und  die  Nachwelt,  Horaz  in  der  Neuzeit,  der 
Einflufi  Senecas;  sie  haben  einzelne  Imitationen  oder  Zitate  registriert  und  dem 
bald  lauteren,  bald  leiseren  Echo  der  antiken  Dichter  oder  Prosaiker  in  spateren 
Jahrhunderten  bis  auf  unsere  Zeit  gelauscht.  Auch  das  ist  sinnvoll  und  not- 
wendig,  vor  allem  bei  den  Autoren,  die  fiir  Bildung  und  Ausbildung  grund- 


4  CARL  JOACHIM   CLASSEN 

legend  sind  und  deren  Kenntnis  daher  allgemein  vorauszusetzen  ist.  Aber  so 
wenig  die  romische  Literatur  nur  Nachleben  der  griechischen  ist,  mag  sie  auch 
vielfaltig  von  ihr  beeinflufit  worden  sein,  so  wenig  ist  die  byzantinische,  die 
mittellateinische  oder  die  neulateinische  nur  Nachleben  der  antiken;  die 
spateren  Literaturen  haben  ihr  Eigenleben.  In  den  letzten  Jahren  hat  man 
es  vielfach  vorgezogen,  von  Rezeption  zu  sprechen  —  aber  auch  das  erscheint 
mir  unbefriedigend;  denn  auch  damit  wird  nur  ein  Aspekt  der  spateren  Lite- 
ratur erfafit,  ein  wichtiger  zwar,  aber  doch  nicht  das  Ganze;  und  wenn  man 
gar  von  Sallustrezeption  oder  von  Horazrezeption  spricht,  wird  der  Blick  wie- 
derum  eingeengt  auf  einen  Teilbereich,  gleichsam  einen  Teil  der  Voraussetz- 
ungen  der  neulateinischen  Literatur,  nicht  diese  selbst.  Was  das  Studium  der 
neulateinischen  Literatur  erfordert,  ist,  die  Vielfalt  der  wirkenden  Faktoren 
und  deren  Zusammenspiel  zu  erfassen,  d.h.  einerseits  die  Wirkung  der  an- 
tiken Tradition  bzw.  das  Traditionsverstandnis  der  neulateinischen  Autoren 
und  damit  die  Wirkung  der  mittellateinischen  ebenso  wie  der  volkssprachlichen 
Traditionen  und  schliefilich  die  Zeitstromungen  und  den  Zeitgeschmack,  d.h. 
die  sich  jeweils  wandelnden  Erwartungen,  die  man  an  ein  Gedicht,  ein  Drama, 
ein  Geschichtswerk  stellt. 

Es  geniigt  nicht,  ein  paar  Reminiszenzen  an  Horaz  oder  Juvenal,  an  Sta- 
tius  oder  Claudian  zu  registrieren,  wenn  wir  den  neulateinischen  Autoren  ge- 
recht  werden  woUen;  es  geniigt  ebensowenig,  wenn  wir  sie  interpretieren,  ohne 
die  Imitationen  oder  Anspielungen  auf  die  Vorbilder  zu  bemerken,  von  denen 
der  einzelne  Autor  erwarten  konnte,  dafi  seine  Leser  im  15.  oder  16.  oder  17. 
Jahrhundert  sie  sofort  horen  wiirden.  Deswegen  ist  die  Mitwirkung  der  klas- 
sischen  Philologen  unentbehrlich.  Neulateinische  Literatur  ist  im  Zusammen- 
hang  ihrer  vielfaltigen  Tradition,  ihrer  eigenen  Entwicklung  und  ihrer 
Verflechtung  mit  der  eigenen  Zeit  zu  studieren  und  dabei  ist  das  jeweils  aus 
der  Tradition  Ubernommene,  aber  auch  das  Vernachlassigte  zu  beriicksich- 
tigen,  und  zwar  aus  der  friiheren  Literatur  und  aus  der  literarischen,  d.h.  rhe- 
torischen  und  poetologischen  Theorie,  und  schliefilich  die  Einfliisse  der 
volkssprachlichen  Literatur  und  die  Tendenzen  der  jeweiligen  Zeit,  der  Zeit- 
geschmack. Daraus  ergibt  sich  die  Forderung  nach  der  Zusammenarbeit  zwi- 
schen  den  klassischen  Philologen  und  den  Neuphilologen  ebenso  wie  zwischen 
den  Philologen  und  den  Historikern,  Philosophen  und  Theologen  — um  nur 
diese  zu  nennen,  eine  Zusammenarbeit,  wie  wir  Altertumswissenschaftler  sie 
seit  Generationen  pflegen  und  wie  sie  ihre  Friichte  am  reichsten  dort  tragt, 
wo  der  einzelne  ohne  Voreingenommenheit  zum  Geben  und  Nehmen  bereit  ist. 

In  diesem  Sinne  darf  ich  dem  Kongrefi  einen  guten  Verlauf,  uns  alien  frucht- 
bare,  arbeitsreiche,  aber  auch  ergebnisreiche  Tage  wiinschen. 


1 

HUMANISM 

AND     THE 

CLASSICAL    TRADITION 


Konrad  Celtis 
und  sein  Buch  iiber  Niirnberg 

Klaus  Arnold 

In  seinem  Libellus  de  origine,  situ,  moribus  et  institutis  Norinbergae  hat  Konrad 
Celtis  den  in  den  Laudes  urbium  haufig  wiederkehrenden  Topos,  wonach 
eine  Stadt  von  Ceres  und  Bacchus  in  besonderem  Mafie  begiinstigt  ist, 
nicht  allein  im  Hinbhck  auf  Niirnberg  wiederholt,  er  hat  in  diesem  Zusam- 
menhang  der  Wirkung  von  Bier  und  Wein  recht  weitgespannte  und  offenkun- 
dig  zeitlose  Uberlegungen  gewidmet:  So  beschaftigt  er  sich  im  15.  Kapitel 
der  Norinberga  unter  anderem  mit  der  Verfalschung  des  Weins  und  fordert  fur 
die  Ubeltater  eine  harte  Bestrafung:  "Diese  Verfalschung,"  meint  der  Autor, 

hat  sich,  wie  vieles  andere  auch,  unser  Zeitalter  ausgedacht  und  diese 
Panscherei  erfunden,  die  sich  nicht  allein  in  Deutschland,  sondern  auch 
...  in  anderen  Landern  als  ein  Verbrechen  eingenistet  hat;  wobei  man 
die  Farbe,  den  Geschmack,  den  Geruch,  die  Starke  und  Reinheit  und 
selbst  die  Herkunftsbezeichnung  verfalscht.  .  .  .  Der  ewigen  Verdamm- 
nis  soUte  anheimfallen,  wer  dieses  Geschenk  der  Natur  zur  krankma- 
chenden  und  todbringenden  Substanz  macht.  .  .  .  Grofie  Mengen 
Schwefel  —  vermischt  mit  weiteren  schadlichen  und  giftigen  Stoffen,  die 
hier  nicht  aufgefiihrt  sein  sollen— ,  werden  den  Weinen  beige fiigt,  ehe 
die  Garung  beendet  ist.  Auf  diese  Weise  wird  die  Natur  verfalscht;  und 
solches  Gift  kaufen  wir.  .  .  . 

Celtis,  ein  sichtlich  betroffener  Kenner  der  Materie,  endet  mit  dem  Appell  an 
den  Niirnberger  Rat,  dieses  Gift  in  den  Fluf^  zu  schiitten  und  alle  Weinpan- 
scher  auf  den  Scheiterhaufen  werfen  zu  lassen.^ 

Auch  iiber  die  Wirkung  des  Bieres  hat  sich  der  Humanist  auf  seinen  Wan- 
derungen  durch  Deutschland  seine  Gedanken  gemacht:  Unmaf^ig  genossen, 
versetzt  es  den  Trinker  in  einen  tumben  und  trunkenen  Zustand,  wahrend 
es  ansonsten  ein  bekommliches  und  durstloschendes  Getrank  darstellt.  Aller- 
dings  hat  Celtis  bei  seinen  Aufenthalten  in  Sachsen  und  in  der  norddeutschen 
Kiistenregion  auch  beobachtet,  dafi  sogar  die  beim  Brauvorgang  anfsdlenden 


8  *  KONRAD  CELTIS  UND  NURNBERG 

Trebern,  noch  lauwarm  auf  den  Strafien  gelagert,  selbst  Kinder,  die  ihre 
Dampfe  einatmen,  zu  wutentbranntem  Kampf  reizten,^ 

Bevor  wir  abschliefiend  noch  einmal  Celtis  zu  Wort  kommen  lassen  wollen, 
erscheinen  einige  Bemerkungen  zu  Leben  und  Werk  des  "deutschen  Erzhu- 
manisten,"^  iiber  Entstehung  und  Uberlieferung  der  Norinberga,  sowie  ein 
kurzer  Blick  auf  die  Gattung  des  Stadtelobs  und  den  Inhalt  dieses  Beispiels 
geboten: 

Auf  der  Burg  von  Niirnberg  wurde  Konrad  Celtis  am  18.  April  1487  als 
der  erste  Deutsche  von  Kaiser  Friedrich  III.  mit  dem  Dichterlorbeer  gekront. 
Vor  ihm  waren  — neben  anderen  —  Francesco  Petrarca  im  Jahr  1341  und  Enea 
Silvio  Piccolomini  1442  dieser  Wiirde  tin^s  poeta  laureatus  teilhaftig  geworden.* 
Fiir  Celtis,  der  dies  stets  als  den  entscheidenden  Einschnitt  in  seinem  Leben 
ansah  und  etwa  seinen  Briefwechsel  nach  den  "Jahren  des  Lorbeers"  anord- 
nete,  v/ar  das  Ereignis  der  Dichterkronung  letztlich  Anlafi  fiir  die  Abfassung 
des  Libellus  de  origine,  situ,  moribus  et  institutis  Norinbergae . 

Geboren  wurde  Conradus  Celtis  Protucius  — wie  viele  aus  der  ersten  Ge- 
neration des  deutschen  Humanismus  —  aus  kleinbauerlichen  Verhaltnissen  am 
1.  Februar  1459  als  Sohn  eines  Winzers  im  wiirzburgischen  Dorf  Wipfeld  am 
Main.  Als  pauper  bezog  er  19jahrig  — noch  unter  seinem  Familiennamen 
"Bickel"  — die  Universitat  Koln;  er  hat  ihn  spater  latinisiert  zu  "Celtis"  nach 
einem  Hapax  legomenon  der  Bibel  {Vulg.  lob  19,  24):  c^/^<?  — "Meifiel"  — was  zu 
allem  Ungliick  noch  aus  certe  verderbt  ist.^ 

1484  hielt  Celtis  sich  fiir  ein  Jahr  in  Heidelberg  auf,  kniipfte  Kontakte 
zu  Rudolf  Agricola  und  zu  Johannes  von  Dalberg,  dem  Kanzler  der  Univer- 
sitat. Danach  nimmt  er  ein  unstetes  Wanderleben  auf,  das  ihn  nach  Erfurt, 
Rostock  und  Leipzig  und  schliefilich  nach  Italien  fiihrt,  wo  er  die  wichtigsten 
Vertreter  des  italienischen  Renaissancehumanismus  (Laetus,  Ficinus,  Beroal- 
dus,  Guarinus  und  Manutius)  personlich  kennenlernt.  Bald  nach  seiner 
Riickkehr  erfolgt,  auf  Fiirsprache  des  sachsischen  Kurfiirsten  Friedrich  des 
Weisen,  dem  er  sein  Erstlingswerk,  die  Ars  versificandi  et  carminum,  gewidmet 
hatte,  die  Dichterkronung. 

In  den  folgenden  Jahren  hat  Celtis  sich  Deutschland  regelrecht  erwandert; 
auf  der  Suche  nach  Material  fiir  eine  Germania  illustrata,  die  er  sein  Leben  lang 
geplant  hat.^  Allenthalben  fmdet  er  Schiiler  und  Gleichgesinnte  seines  hu- 
manistischen  Lebensideals,  versucht  gelehrte  Gesellschaften  (sodalitates)  zu  eta- 
blieren  nach  dem  Vorbild  des  Pomponius  Laetus.  Endlich  miindet  sein  Weg 
in  ruhigere  Bahnen:  1492  wird  er  Professor  fiir  Poetik  und  Rhetorik  an  der 
Universitat  Ingolstadt  und  1497  schliefilich  an  der  Universitat  Wien;  dort  ist 
er  am  4.  Februar  1508,  noch  nicht  fiinfzigjahrig,  gestorben. 

Ergebnis  von  Celtis'  Wanderjahren  waren  die  1502  im  Druck  erschienenen 
Quattuor  libriAmorum  secundum  quattuor  latera  Germaniae,  die  an  Horaz,  Ovid  und 
Vergil  ankniipfen  und  im  Anhang  auch  die  Beschreibung  von  Niirnberg  iiber- 
liefern.  Mit  Ausnahme  seiner  friihen  Dichtkunst,  einer  griechischen  Gram- 


KLAUS  ARNOLD  Q 

matik,  seiner  Ingolstadter  Antrittsvorlesung  von  1492  — und  eben  der  Norin- 
^fr^a  —  erscheinen  die  Hauptwerke  des  Humanisten  in  poetischem  Gewand: 
Fiinf  Biicher  Epigramme,  die  1513  posthum  erschienenen  Libri  odarum  quattuor 
und  die  Ludi,  Theaterstiicke,  an  deren  Auffiihrung  der  Dichter  selbst  mit- 
wirkte. 

Daneben  hat  Celtis  Ausgaben  von  Seneca,  Apuleius,  Tacitus  sowie  Nico- 
laus  von  Cues  betreut  und  mit  Einleitungen  versehen,  Und  Celtis  hat  die  Werke 
der  Hrotsvith  von  Gandersheim  und  des  Ligurinus,  die  er  in  den  Klostern 
Ebrach  und  St.  Emmeram  in  Regensburg  entdeckte,  vor  dem  Vergessen  be- 
wahrt  und  zum  Druck  gebracht. 

Des  Celtis  friiher  Tod  hat  seine  Plane  nicht  reifen  lassen;  vieles  blieb  le- 
diglich  Anregung:  neben  der  nicht  ausgefiihrten  Germania  die  Ausgabe  seiner 
Briefe  und  eine  wohl  fiir  das  Epochenjahr  1500  geplante  Gesamtausgabe  seiner 
Werke. ^  Letztere  zumindest  soil  nunmehr  durch  den  Plan  einer  neuen 
lateinisch-deutschen  Edition  seiner  Opera  omnia  doch  noch  Wirklichkeit  werden. 
Diese  achtbandig  konzipierte  "Erste  Celtis  — Gesamtausgabe"  wird  unter  der 
Aegide  von  Dieter  Wuttke  vorbereitet;  als  Band  2  ist  die  Neuausgabe  der  No- 
rinberga  vorgesehen. 

In  der  Stadt  Niirnberg  hat  sich  Celtis  nach  seiner  Dichterkronung  1487 
und  zwischen  seinen  Wanderungen  durch  Deutschland  vielfach  aufgehalten; 
verstarkt  seit  dem  Herbst  des  Jahres  1491;  in  den  folgenden  Monaten  scheint 
sein  Aufenthalt  zwischen  Ingolstadt,  Regensburg  und  Niirnberg  in  kurzen 
Abstanden  zu  wechseln.  In  Niirnberg  tritt  er  in  engere  Verbindung  zu  Se- 
bald  Schreyer,  dem  Kirchenmeister  von  St.  Sebald,  zu  dem  Juristen  und  Pa- 
trizier  Sixtus  Tucher,  zu  den  Lehrern  an  der  Lateinschule,  Peter  Danhauser 
und  Johann  Grieninger,  zu  Willibald  und  zu  Caritas  Pirckheimer  und  natiir- 
lich  zu  dem  Arzt  und  Chronisten  Hartmann  Schedel. 

Erste  Hinweise  auf  eine  im  Entstehen  begriffene  Arbeit  iiber  Niirnberg  gibt 
es  1492  in  einem  Brief  des  Astronomen  Johannes  Tolophus  {Noriburgii  fata  seu 
situm  moresque  te  designasse  scribis.  .  .),  wofiir  Tolophus  in  diesem  Zusammen- 
hang  Stellungnahmen  iiber  die  fiir  Niirnbergs  Geschicke  wichtigen  Konstel- 
lationen  der  Sterne  sowie  uber  mogliche  etymologische  Deutungen  abgibt.^ 
Dafi  Celtis  im  Herbst  des  Jahres  1493  sich  langer  in  Niirnberg  aufhielt  — 
oder  dies  doch  vorhatte  —  geht  aus  einem  Vertrag  hervor,  den  er,  "Cunnradus 
Celtis  Poeta,"  mit  "Sebolt  Schreyer  Burger  zu  Nurmberg"  unter  dem  Datum 
des  23.  November  uber  eine  durch  ihn  vorzunehmende  Uberarbeitung  der 
Schedelschen  Weltchronik  abschloft;  die  Sache  ist  wegen  des  schlechten  Ab- 
satzes  der  ersten  Auflage  des  Prachtwerks  freiUch  nicht  zustandegekommen.'^ 

Anfang  1494  war  die  Norinberga  beendet:  Bald  nach  dem  30.  Januar  erbittet 
der  Autor  von  Sixtus  Tucher  die  Riicksendung  seines  Werkes  nach  Ingol- 
stadt;^' und  der  Titel  mit  dem  Incipit  erscheint  bereits  in  dem  1494  gedruck- 
ten  Schriftstellerkatalog  des  Johannes  Trithemius  De  scriptoribus  ecclesiasticis .^^ 
Diese  Erstfassung  der  Norinberga  ist  nicht  erhalten  geblieben;  wie  auch  sonst 


10  •  KONRAD  CELTIS  UND  NURNBERG 

kein  auf  Celtis  unmittelbar  zuriickgehendes  Zeugnis  dieses  Textes.  Lediglich 
Spuren  der  Existenz  einer  solchen  Fassung  lassen  sich  in  einem  aus  Schedels 
Besitz  stammenden  Miinchner  Codex  sichern.^^  Eine  weitere  Redaktion  aus 
dieser  Zeit  wird  durch  eine  neu  entdeckte  Prager  Uberlieferung  fafibar.'*  Der 
Autor  arbeitete  und  feilte  weiter  an  seinem  Text;  zuweilen  unter  widrigen 
Umstanden:  einmal  klagt  er  (iber  den  Verlust  seines  Exemplars,  dessen  Ein- 
zelteile  er  aus  einer  Latrine  klauben  und  unter  groften  Miihen  rekonstruieren 
mufite.^^ 

Der  Versuch  wird  erfolgreich  gewesen  sein,  denn  im  Marz  1495  dediziert 
der  Poet  sein  Werk  dem  Niirnberger  Rat;  es  wird  der  Ratsbibliothek  ein- 
verleibt.  Auf  das  (undatierte)  Begleitschreiben  des  Autors  hat  der  Rat  unter 
dem  9.  Juli  1495  geantwortet;  eine  mehrfache  Enttauschung  fur  den  Dich- 
ter:  nicht  nur,  dafi  von  einer  Anerkennung  in  klingender  Miinze  keine  Rede 
war;  Lateinkenntnisse  waren  —  zumindest  unter  den  Niirnberger  Ratsherrn  — 
schon  damals  Man  gel  ware:  Celtis,  der  poeta  laureatus,  mufite  einen  Affront 
darin  erkennen,  dafi  sein  Sprachkunstwerk  zuerst  einmal  ins  Deutsche  iiber- 
tragen  werden  sollte;  noch  dazu  von  Georg  Alt,  dem  Ratsschreiber,  der 
sich  — mehr  schlecht  als  recht  — schon  an  Schedels  Weltchronik  versucht 
hatte.'^ 

Wie  die  Erstfassung  ist  auch  das  Widmungsexemplar  verloren.  Als  ein  Re- 
likt  hat  sich  in  anderem  Uberlieferungszusammenhang  das  Widmungsbild  er- 
halten:  Die  farbig  angelegte  Zeichnung  zeigt  den  lorbeerbekranzten  Dichter 
bei  der  Uberreichung  seines  Werkes  an  zwei  Niirnberger  Ratsherrn,  die  durch 
die  beigegebenen  Wappen  als  die  Losunger  Paul  Volckamer  und  Gabriel 
Niitzel  zu  erkennen  sind;  am  Fufi  des  Blattes  ist  des  Celtis  eigenes,  mono- 
grammartiges  Wappen  zu  erkennen/^  Ebenfalls  im  Original  verloren,  doch 
in  zwei  guten  Handschriften,  Autographen  HEirtmann  Schedels  und  Sebald 
Schreyers,  iiberliefert  ist  die  Ubersetzung  des  Georg  Alt.^^  Die  Handschrift 
der  lateinischen  Fassung  hat  Celtis  1497  vom  Niirnberger  Rat  zur  erneuten 
Uberarbeitung  erbeten,  ohne  sie  je  wieder  zuriickzugeben.'^  Nur  das  dritte 
Kapitel  iiber  den  Hercinischen  Wald  — den  Deutschland  damals  noch  iiber- 
ziehenden  Waldgiirtel  —  wurde  leicht  iiberarbeitet  1500  von  Celtis  seiner  Edi- 
tion der  Germania  des  Tacitus  hinzugefiigt.^^ 

Im  Jahr  1502  erschien  schliefilich,  vom  Autor  iiberwacht  und  von  ihm  selbst 
sicherlich  als  endgiiltig  angesehen,  in  Niirnberg  die  Druckausgabe  der  A'o- 
rinberga.  Als  leicht  veranderte  Variante  der  Stadtansicht  in  Schedels  Weltchronik 
ist  dem  Amores-T>Y\ic\i  eine  Vedute  der  Stadt  von  Siidwesten  beigegeben.^^ 

Die  bisher  mafigebende  Ausgabe  der  Norinberga  von  Albert  Werminghoff, 
erschienen  1921  in  Freiburg,  versuch te  in  typographisch  wenig  glucklicher 
Weise  die  beiden  Versionen  in  eins  zu  arbeiten.  Fiir  einen  Vergleich  zwischen 
der  alteren  Fassung  von  1495  und  der  endgiiltigen  von  1502  und  damit  fiir 
eine  Untersuchung  der  Arbeitsweise  des  Autors  bietet  dieses  Verfahren  im- 
merhin  einen  Vorteil:  So  ist  bei  einer  Analyse  der  Anderungen  zu  erken- 


KLAUS  ARNOLD  II 

nen,  dafi  diese  in  der  Mehrzaihl  (in  97  Fallen)  stilistischer  Art  sind,  sowie  (in 
88  Fallen)  sachliche  Erganzungen  darstellen.  Hinzu  kommen  28  nicht  sach- 
lich  begriindbare  Hinzufiigungen  bzw.  Weglassungen  und  in  elf  Fallen  die 
Einfiigung  griechischer  Wendungen,  die  vorher  nicht  vorhanden  waren. 

Die  geplante  Neuedition  wird  neben  einer  iiberlieferungsgeschichtlichen  Ein- 
leitung  die  vom  Autor  selbst  als  die  endgiiltige  angesehene  und  im  Druck  be- 
treute  Fassung  des  ^mor^^-Drucks  von  1502  mit  einem  Variantenapparat, 
Zitatnachweis  sowie  Sachanmerkungen  und  einer  Paralleliibersetzung  ins  Neu- 
hochdeutsche  enthalten.  Vorangestellt  wird  jedoch  auch  —  wiederum  im 
Paralleldruck  — die  Edition  der  ersten  greifbaren  lateinischen  Fassung  von  1495 
mit  der  aus  ihr  hervorgegangenen  fruhneuhochdeutschen  Ubertragung  Georg 
Alts,  beide  nach  der  Miinchner  Leithandschrift  aus  dem  Besitz  Hartmann 
Schedels. 

Nach  Inhalt  und  Gliederung  hat  Celtis  sich  in  seiner  Norinberga  im  allge- 
meinen  an  die  Topik  der  Stadtschilderung  gehalten,  wie  sie  sich  bereits  im  3. 
Jh.  bei  Menander  fmdet,  der  als  ihre  Bestandteile  die  Lage  hinsichtlich  des 
Sternenhimmels,  zu  Festland  und  Meer  und  in  der  Landschaft,  die  Befesti- 
gung  der  Stadt,  ihre  Bauten,  Schatze  und  Einrichtungen,  die  Bewohner  und 
ihre  Fahigkeiten  und  den  Vergleich  mit  andgren  Stadten  auffuhrt.  Diesem 
Schema  entsprechend  existieren  eine  Reihe  von  fruhmittelalterlichen  Stadt- 
beschreibungen  vom  8.  bis  zum  12.  Jahrhundert,  meist  in  Gedichtform.^^ 

Celtis  vorangegangen  waren  unter  anderem  im  13.  Jh.  ein  Lob  Erfurts  in 
einem  Gedicht  des  Nikolaus  von  Bibera,  1288  die  Beschreibung  der  Stadt  Mai- 
land  von  Bonvesin  de  la  Riva,  im  14.  Jh.  zwei  Lobschriften  auf  Paris  eines 
Anonymus  und  des  Johannes  von  Jandun,  und  in  Italien  Petrarca  und  Cola 
di  Rienzo  in  ihrer  Begeisterung  fur  die  Herrlichkeit  des  antiken  Rom.^^  Bald 
nach  1400  entstand  die  Laudatio  Florentinae  urbis  des  Leonardo  Bruni  und  1436 
Pier  Candido  Decembrios  Gegenschrift  zum  Lob  Mailands;^*  Padua  wurde 
1446  von  Michele  Savonarola  beschrieben,  gefolgt  1447  von  der  Roma  instau- 
rata  und  1448-1453  von  der  Italia  illustrata  des  Flavio  Biondo.^^  Diese  beiden 
Schriften  Biondos  lagen  1481/82  bereits  im  Druck  vor  und  hatten  ohne  Zwei- 
fel  Einflufi  auf  Celtis;  ebenso  wie  die  Germania  des  Enea  Silvio,  welche  eine 
knappe  Beschreibung  Niirnbergs  enthielt;^^  sowie  natiirlich,  bis  in  die  Titel- 
gebung  hinein  spiirbar,  die  Germania  des  Tacitus.  Letztere  ist  mehrfach  auch 
zitiert,  neben  Hesiods  Theogonie  und  der  Geographic  des  Ptolemaeus;  daneben 
hat  Celtis  benutzt:  des  Plinius  Naturalis  historia,  Pomponius  Melas  Chorographia^ 
Caesars  Gallischen  Krieg,  Einhards  Annalen  zu  den  Jahren  793  und  797,  sowie 
den  Stiftungsbrief  des  Niirnberger  Sebastiansspitals. 

Das  erste  Beispiel  humanistischen  Stadtelobs  in  Deutschland  war  1452  Al- 
brechts  von  Eyb  Oratio  ad  laudem  et  commendationem  Bambergae  civitatis^  die  in  die 
Margarita  poetica  dieses  Autors  Aufnahme  fand.^^  Fiir  Niirnberg  waren  Cel- 
tis in  deutschen  Versen  bereits  vorausgegangen  Hans  Rosenpliit  mit  einem 
Spruch  von  395  Versen  (1447)  und  Eyn  new  gedicht  der  loblichen  stat  Niirnberg 


12  •  KONRAD  CELTIS  UND   NURNBERG 

von  Kuntz  Has,  verfafit  und  gedruckt  (wie  Rosenpliit)  im  Jahr  1490.^^  Die 
Nachfolge  des  Celtis  lafit  kaum  erkennen  Ein  lobspruch  der  statt  Nurnberg  des 
Hans  Sachs  von  1530;^  wahrend  drei  lateinische  Autoren  des  16.  Jhs.  in 
Kenntnis  und  Nachfolge  der  Norinberga  abgefafit  wurden:  Die  Brevis  Germaniae 
Descriptio  des  Johannes  Cochlaeus  (1512),^^  die  Exegesis  Germaniae  des  Francis- 
cus  Irenicus,  gedruckt  1518,^^  und  die  Noriberga  illustrata  des  Helius  Eobanus 
Hessus  (1532),  die  allein  an  das  grofie  Vorbild  heranreichte  und  es  — als  Werk 
der  Dichtkunst  —  sicherlich  noch  iibertraf.^^ 

Celtis  hat  seine  Norinberga  in  16  Kapitel  unterteilt.  Sie  machen  den  Leser 
mit  Lage  und  Umgebung  der  Stadt  vertraut,  stellen  ihr  aufieres  Erscheinungs- 
bild  vor  mit  Burg  und  Mauern,  mit  Kirchen  und  Spitalern  und  beschreiben 
die  stadtische  Verwaltung.  Eingestreut  fmden  sich  eine  Reihe  von  kulturge- 
schichtlichen  Einzelheiten  und  Episoden:  An  die  Druiden  im  Hercinischen 
Wald  wird  in  romantischer  Verklarung  ebenso  erinnert  wie  an  den  Fischreich- 
tum  im  Pegnitzflufi,  an  die  jahrliche  Heiltumsweisung  und  die  Erfmdung  des 
Drahtziehens  in  Nurnberg;  gedacht  wird  Karls  —  offenbar  zeitlosen  —  Plans 
einer  Kanalverbindung  vom  Main  zur  Donau,  der  zur  Aufforstung  notwen- 
digen  Entwicklung  der  Waldsaat  fiir  den  Niirnberger  Reichswald  sowie  der 
Erfmdung  des  Buchdrucks  in  Mainz;  iiber  den  Bau  des  Turms  "Luginsland" 
auf  der  Burg  wird  berichtet  und  die  reiche  Ausstattung  der  Biirgerhauser  ge- 
schildert.  Mit  Befriedigung  erfahren  wir  von  den  Mafinahmen  des  Rats  gegen 
die  Weinpanscherei  und  die  Wegelagerei  von  Strafienraubern;  erschrecken 
iiber  die  Begleiterscheinungen  von  Hungersnoten  nach  Mifiernten  und  auch 
iiber  des  Autors  Billigung  der  Judenvertreibung  aus  Niirnberg  im  Jahr  1495; 
und  werden  in  den  Bann  einzelner  Szenen  gezogen:  Kaiser  Friedrich  III.  bei 
seinem  Einzug  in  die  Stadt  und  auf  der  Burg  von  Kindern  umringt,  die  Ein- 
kleidung  einer  Klosterfrau,  die  grausamen  Begleiterscheinungen  der  Straf- 
rechtspflege,  aber  auch  die  Beschreibung  beschaulicher  Spazierwege. 

Das  6.  Kapitel  behandelt  die  Gestirne,  die  iiber  der  Stadt  stehen  und  ihr 
Schicksal  bestimmen,  die  Lage  der  Stadt  und  ihre  Bewohner: 

Der  geographischen  Lange  nach  liegt  Niirnberg  nahezu  in  der  Mitte 
Europas;  daher  riihrt,  dafi  die  Stadt  nicht  allein  im  Mittelpunkt  von  ganz 
Deutschland,  sondern  auch  von  ganz  Europa  gelegen  ist:  denn  sie  liegt 
gleich  weit  von  der  Ostsee  wie  von  der  Adria  entfernt,  sowie  etwa  in 
gleicher  Entfernung  vom  offenen  Ozean  wie  von  den  Ufern  des  Don.^^ 

Zum  Abschlufi  dieses  kurzen  Abrisses  sollten  wir  uns  noch  von  einem  Bei- 
spiel  der  meisterhaften  Naturschilderung  des  Celtis  in  Bann  ziehen  lassen.  Es 
beschreibt  das  sommerliche  Leben  und  Treiben  auf  zwei  Wiesenplatzen  am 
Ufer  der  Pegnitz,  die  die  Niirnberger  zu  Spiel  und  Erholung  aufsuchen.  Der 
eine  von  ihnen  ist  die  Hallerwiese  im  Westen  der  Stadt.  Der  zweite  dieser  som- 
merlichen  Treffpunkte  liegt  innerhalb  der  Stadt, 


KLAUS  ARNOLD  I3 

dort,  WO  der  Flufi  im  Osten  durch  offene  Bogen,  die  mit  Befestigungen 
und  Gattern  geschiitzt  sind,  in  die  Stadt  hineinfliefit  und  zwei  Inseln 
ausbildet.  Die  erste  dieser  Inseln  ist  kiinsdich  angelegt  und  hat  ihren 
Namen  — Insel  Schiitt  — nach  dieser  Aufschiittung  von  Erde  und  Sand. 
Und  wahrend  die  zweite  recht  schmal  ist,  ist  diese  ausladender  und  mit 
einem  wunderschonen  um  sie  herumfiihrenden  Spazierweg  versehen, 
der  parkartig  vollstandig  von  Baumen  umsaumt  wird.  Besonders  an- 
genehm  sind  die  Schatten  zur  Sommerzeit,  wenn  die  Baumstamme  an 
den  beiden  Flufiufern  eine  Art  Saulengang  bilden.  Innen  ist  dieser  Platz 
ganz  sonnig  und  offen,  .  .  .  Dahin  stromt  bei  Sonnenuntergang  und  zu 
Einbruch  der  Nacht  auf  der  Flucht  vor  der  sommerlichen  Hitze  eine  zahl- 
reiche  Menschenmenge  zusammen  und  wandelt  unter  leisen  Gesangen 
und  siifeem  Gemurmel  durch  den  stillen  und  opaken  Schatten.  Dann  kann 
man  den  Klang  der  unterschiedhchen  Stimmen  erlauschen,  mit  denen 
sich  die  jungen  Manner  und  die  Madchen  artig  griifien  und  den  Grufi 
beantworten.  Und  es  ist  ein  Wunder  zu  nennen,  dafi  an  diesem  Platz 
noch  nie  Blut  vergossen  wurde  noch  je  Zwietracht  oder  Hader  entstand; 
so  grofi  scheint  hier  der  Einklang  des  Geistes  mit  der  Natur.  ...  * 


Anmerkungen 


1.  A.  Werminghoff,  Conrad  Celtis  und  sein  Buck  ilber  Niirnberg,  Freiburg  i.Br.  1921, 
196  ff. 

2.  Werminghoff,  Niirnberg,  172. 

3.  Zu  Biographie  und  Bibliographie  zuletzt  D.  Wuttke,  "Conradus  Celtis  Protucius," 
in:  Lexikon  des  Mittelalters,  Bd.  2,  Zurich  und  Miinchen  1983,  1608-1611. 

4.  R.  Specht,  Dichterkronungen  bis  zum  Aus gang  des  Mittelalters ,  Zerbst  1928.  K.  Schot- 
tenloher,  "Kaiserliche  Dichterkronungen  im  Heiligen  Romischen  Reiche  Deutscher 
Nation,"  in:  Papsttum  und  Kaisertum.  Festschrift  fiir  Paul  Kehr  zum  65.Geburtstag,  Miinchen 
1926;  Ndr.  Aalen  1973,  648-73.  J.  B.  Trapp,  "The  Poet  Laureate:  Rome,  Renovatio 
and  Translatio  Imperii,"  in:  Rome  in  the  Renaissance.  The  City  and  the  Myth,  hrsg.  von 
P.  A.  Ramsey,  Binghamton  1982,  93-130;  ders.,  "Dichterkronung,"  in:  Lexikon  des  Mit- 
telalters, Bd.  3,  Zurich  und  Munchen  1985,  975-77. 

5.  H.  Rupprich,  (Hrsg.),  Der  Briefwechsel des Konrad Celtis ,  Munchen  1934,  VI  f.  Wer- 
minghoff (s.A.  1),  Niirnberg,  104. 

6.  P.  Melchers,  "Das  griechische  Element  in  den  deutschen  Humanistennamen,"  in: 
Atti  e  Memorie  del  VII.  Congresso  di  scienze  onomastiche  Firenze  —  Pisa  1961,  Bd.  3,  1963, 
219-26;  ders.,  "Die  Bedeutung  des  Konrad  Celtis  fiir  die  Namenforschung,"  in:  Na- 
menforschung.  Festschrift  fiir  Adolf  Bach,  Heidelberg  1965,  160-67. 

7.  G.  Strauss,  Sixteenth-Century  Germany.  Its  Topography  and  Topographers,  Madison  1959, 
bes.  19  ff.  J.  Ride,  "Un  grand  projet  patriotique  'Germania  illustrata' ",  in:  L'Humanisme 
allemand  1480-1540,  1979,  99-112. 

8.  D.  Wuttke,  "Durer  und  Celtis.  Von  der  Bedeutung  des  Jahres  1500  fiir  den  deut- 


14  KONRAD  CELTIS  UND   NURNBERG 

schen  Humanismus,''in:  The  Journal  of  Medieval  and  Renaissance  Studies  10,  1980,  73-129. 

9.  Rupprich  (s.A.  5)  Briefwechsel,  110  ff.  Nr.  66;  ohne  Not  hat  der  Hrsg.  die  Da- 
tierung  "Datum  raptissime  ex  Ratispona  92"  in  1493  abgeandert. 

10.  H.  Bosch,  "Eine  projektiert  gewesene  zweite  Ausgabe  der  sogen.  Schederschen 
Chronik,"  in:  Mitteilungen  aus  dem  germanischen  Nationalmuseum  1,  1884-86,  37-39.  E. 
Riicker,  Die  Schedelsche  Weltchronik.  Das  grofite  Buchunternehmen  der  Diirerzeit,  Miinchen 
1974,  113  f.;  dies.,  "Niirnberger  Friihhumanisten  und  ihre  Beschaftigung  mit  Geo- 
graphic.  Zur  Frage  einer  Mitarbeit  von  Hieronymus  Miinzer  und  Conrad  Celtis  am 
Text  der  Schedelschen  Weltchronik,"  in:  Wolfenbiitteler  Abhandlungen  zur  Renaissancefor- 
schung  5,  1980,  181-92. 

11.  Rupprich  (s.A.  5)  Briefwechsel,  119  f.  Nr.  71.  K.  Hartfelder,  "Konrad  Celtis  und 
Sixtus  Tucher,"  in:  Zeitschrift  fiir  Vergleichende  Litteraturgeschichte  und  Renaissance- Litteratur 
NF  3,  1890,  331-49. 

12.  Johannes  Trithemius,  De  scriptoribus  ecclesiasticis ,  in:  Opera  historica,  ed.  M.  Fre- 
her,  Frankfurt/Main  1601,  390. 

13.  elm  431,  fol.  9'"-52'.  Werminghoff  (s.A.  1)  Niirnberg,  91. 

14.  Praha,  Statni  Knihovna  CSR,  Ms  Ro  VI  F  b  3,  fol.  r-18''. 

15.  Rupprich  (s.A.  5)  Briefwechsel,  150  f. :  "Collegi  enim  laceras  quasdam  chartas  circa 
latrinam  dissipatas,  ex  quibus  fortasse  descriptio  ilia  tuae  patriae  resarciri  poterit,  sed 
magnis  laboribus  .  .  ."  schreibt  Celtis  1495  an  Sebald  Schreyer. 

16.  Rupprich,  Briefwechsel,  154  ff.  Nr.  94,  95,  96,  97.  Werminghoff,  (s.A.  1)  Niirnberg, 
203.  E.  Reicke,  "Konrad  Celtis  und  die  Ehrengabe  fiir  seine  Norimberga.  Eine  falsche 
Beschuldigung  des  Niirnberger  Rats,"  in:  Mitteilungen  des  Vereins  fur  die  Geschichte  der 
Stadt  Nurnberg  35,  1937,  89-105. 

17.  cgm  4995,  fol.  1";  beschrieben  und  abgebildet  bei  Werminghoff,  Niirnberg,  ge- 
geniiber  dem  Titel  und  S.  93. 

18.  elm  951,  fol.  55^-116'';  Nurnberg,  Stadtbibliothek,  Cent.  IV  89,  fol.  63'-112'; 
weitere  Textzeugen  bei  Werminghoff,  Nurnberg,  92  ff. 

19.  Rupprich  (s.A.  5)  Briefwechsel,  278  ff.  Nr.  167,  168. 

20.  "Ex  libro  C.  C.  de  situ  et  moribus  Norinberge  de  hercinie  silue  magnitudine  et 
de  eius  in  Europa  defmitione  et  populis  incolis,"  in:  Cornelii  Taciti  De  origine  et  situ  Ger- 
manorum  Liber,  o.O.u.J.  (hrsg.  von  Konrad  Celtis:  Wien,  Johannes  Winterburger,  ca. 
1500)  ( =  Hain  15225),  fol.  c  iiif -c  vf . 

21.  Konrad  Celtis,  Quatuor  libri  Amorum,  Niirnberg,  Drucker  der  "Sodalitas  Celtica," 
1502:  (je  nach  den  verschiedenen  Druckzustanden  an  unterschiedlicher  Stelle)  dem  Text 
der  Norinberga  vorangestellt.  J.  Benzing,  "Wer  war  der  Drucker  fiir  die  Sodalitas  Cc\\.- 
ica.  in  Nurnberg?,"  in:  Mitteilungen  aus  der  Stadtbibliothek  Niirnberg ]g.  2,  H.  2,  1955,  1-14; 
ders.,  "Anton  Peypus  zu  Niirnberg.  Ein  vergessener  Drucker  des  16.  Jahrhunderts," 
in:  Gutenberg  Jahrbuch  1965,  169-70. 

22.  W.  Hammer,  Latin  and  German  Encomia  of  Cities,  Diss.  Chicago  1937.  E.  Giegler, 
Das  Genos  der  Laudes  urbium  im  Mittelalter.  Beitrdge  zur  Topik  des  Stddtelobes  und  der  Stadt- 
schilderung.  Diss.  Wiirzburg  1953  (Maschr.)  J.  K.  Hyde,  "Medieval  descriptions  of 
cities,"  in:  Bulletin  of  the  John  Rylands  Library  48,  1965/66,  308-40.  C.J.  Classen,  Die  Stadt 
im  Spiegel  der  Descriptiones  und  Laudes  urbium  in  der  antiken  und  mittelalterlichen  Literatur  bis 
zum  Ende  des  12.  Jahrhunderts,  Hildesheim  1980.  P.  G.  Schmidt,  "Mittelalterliches  und 
humanistisches  Stadtelob,"  in:  Die  Rezeption  der  Antike,  hrsg.  von  A.  Buck,  Hamburg 

1981,  119-28.  H.  Weifihaar-Kiem,  Lobschriften  und  Beschreibungen  ehemaliger  Reichs-und 
Residenzstddte  in  Bayern  bis  1800.  Die  Geschichte  der  Texte  und  ihre  Bibliographic,  Mittenwald 

1982,  bes.   13-39.  G.  Theuerkauf,  "Accipe  Germanam  pingentia  carmina  terram. 
Stadt-  und  Landesbeschreibungen  des  Mittelalters  und  der  Renaissance  als  Quellen 


KLAUS  ARNOLD  I5 


der  Sozialgeschichte,"  in:  Archivjiir  Kulturgeschtchte  65,  1983,  89-116.  H.  Kugler,  "Stadt 
und  Land  im  humanistischen  Denken,"  in:  Humanismus  und  Okonomie,  hrsg.  von  H. 
Lutz,  Weinheim  1983,  159-82. 

23.  Th.  Fischer,  Nicolai  de  Bibera  Occulti  Erfordensis  Carmen  Satiricum,  in:  Geschichts- 
quellen  der  Provinz  Sachsen  1,  Halle  1870.  F.  Novati,  (Hrsg.),  "De  Magnalibus  urbis 
Mediolani,"  in:  Bulletino  dell'Istituto  Storico  Italiano  20,  1898,  1-188;  Bonvesin  della  Riva, 
Grandezze  diMilano,  testo  latino  e  versione  a  cura  di  A.  Paredi,  Mailand  1967.  Le  Roux 
de  Lincy  et  L.  M.  Tisserand,  Paris  et  ses  historiens  au  XI f  et  XV  siecles,  Paris  1867, 
32-78. 

24.  Leonardo  Bruni,  Laudatio  Florentinae  urbis,  hrsg.  von  Hans  Baron,  From  Petrarch 
to  Leonardo  Bruni,  Chicago  und  London  1968,  232-63.  Petrus  Candidus  Decembrius, 
De  Laudibus  Mediolanensis  urbis  Panegyricus ,  in:  ders.,  Opuscula  historica,  edd.  A.  Butti  u.a. 
(RISS  XX,  1),  Bologna  1958,  1013-1025.  Zu  dieser  literarischen  Auseinandersetzung 
vgl.  M.  Lentzen  in  diesem  Band. 

25.  Michele  Savonarola,  Libellus  de  magnificis  ornamentis  regie  civitatis  Padue,  a  cura  di 
A.  Segarizzi  (RISS  XXIV,  15),  Citta  di  Castello  1942. 

26.  Enea  Silvio  Piccolomini,  Germania,  hrsg.  von  Adolf  Schmidt,  Koln-Graz  1962, 
102  f.  die  Beschreibung  Niirnbergs;  knapper  in  Eneas  Europa,  gedr.  Opera  omnia,  Basel 
1551,  Ndr.  Frankfurt/Main  1967,  436.  Erich  L.  Schmidt,  "Von  der  taciteischen  zur 
humanistischen  Germania,"  in:  Deutsches  Jahrbuch  fiir  Volkskunde  1,  1955,  11-40. 

27.  Albrecht  von  Eyb,  Ad  laudem  et  commendationem  Bambergae  ciuitatis  oratio,  hrsg.  von 
W.  Hammer,  "Albrecht  von  Eyb,  Eulogist  of  Bamberg,"  in:  Germanic  Review  17,  1942, 
3-19;  die  Schrift  erscheint  als  Nr.  16  in  Albrechts  1459  fertiggestellter  und  ab  1472 
gedruckter  Margarita  poetica;  vgl.  G.  Klecha  in:  Die  deutsche  Literatur  des  Mittelalters .  Ver- 

fasserlexikon,  2.  Aufl.,  Bd.  1,  Berlin  1978,  180-86. 

28.  Hans  Rosenpluts  genannt  Schnepperer  Spruch  von  Niirnberg,  hrsg.  von  G.  W.  K.  Loch- 
ner,  Niirnberg  1854.  K.  A.  Barack,  "Ein  Lobgedicht  auf  Niirnberg  aus  dem  Jahre 
1490  von  dem  Meister-Sanger  Kuntz  Hafi,"  in:  Zeitschrift  fiir  deutsche  Kulturgeschichte  3, 
1858,  376-405.  Zu  Niirnberg  als  Gegenstand  von  Stadtbeschreibung  und  Stadtelob: 
Werminghoff,  Niirnberg  (s.A.  1)  62-87.  Jean  Lebeau,  "L'eloge  de  Nuremberg  dans  la 
tradition  populaire  et  la  litterature  humaniste  de  1447  a  1532,"  in:  Hommage  a  Diirer. 
Strasbourg  et  Nuremberg  dans  la  premiere  moitie  du  XVf  siecle,  Strasbourg  1972,  15-35. 
Weifihaar-Kiem  (S.A.  22)  Lobschriften,  48  ff.,  271  ff.  F.  MachUek,  "Kartographie, 
Welt-  und  Landesbeschreibung  in  Niirnberg  um  1500,"  in:  Landesbeschreibungen 
Mitteleuropas  vom  15.  bis  17.Jahrhundert,  hrsg.  von  H.-B.  Harder,  Koln/Wien  1983,  1-12. 

29.  Hans  Sachs,  Ein  lobspruch  der statt Niirnberg,  Niirnberg  1530;  Hans  Sachs,  {Werke) 
hrsg.  von  A.  von  Keller,  Stuttgart  1870,  Ndr.  Hildesheim  1964,  189-99.  H.  Kugler, 
"Die  Stadt  im  Wald.  Zur  Stadtbeschreibung  bei  Hans  Sachs,"  in:  Hans  Sachs.  Studien 
zur friiJibiirgerlichen  Literatur  im  16.Jahrhundert,  hrsg.  von  Th.  Cramer,  Bern  1978,  83-103. 

30.  Johannes  Cochlaeus,  Brevis  Germaniae  descriptio  (1512),  hrsg. ,  iibersetzt  und  kom- 
mentiert  von  K.  Langosch,  Darmstadt  1960. 

31 .  Franciscus  Irenicus,  Germaniae  exegeseos  volumina  duodecim,  Hagenau  1518  (im  An- 
hang  fol.  Tj-Ujjjdie  Norinberga  des  Celtis). 

32.  Helius  Eobanus  Hessus,  Noriberga  illustrata  und  andere  Stddtegedichte ,  hrsg.  von  J. 
Neff,  Berlin  1896.  — Eine  Neuausgabe  wird  von  H.  Vredeveld  vorbereitet. 

33.  Werminghoff  (s.A.  1)  Nurnberg,  147  f. 

34.  Werminghoff,  Niirnberg,  134  f. 


Traductions  latines  des  Oeuvres  de  Jean  Damascene 

editions  de  Cologne  (1546)  et  de  Bale  (1548). 

Presentation  du  contenu  et  etude  des  deux 

traductions  du  "De  duabus  Christi  voluntatibus" 

Irena  Backus 


Deja  a  partir  du  12^  siecle,  les  traductions  latines  des  ouvrages  de 
Jean  Damascene  connaissaient  une  enorme  fortune  en  Occident. 
II  suffit  de  mentionner  ici  la  traduction  du  Defide  orthodoxa  par  Bur- 
gundio,  dont  il  existe  env.  120  temoins  manuscrits,  ainsi  que  les  traductions 
des  divers  traites  faites  par  Robert  Grosseteste.^  II  n'y  a  pas  de  rupture  to- 
tale  entre  les  traductions  medievales  et  les  traductions  "humanistes"  au  mo- 
ment ou  sont  imprimees  les  premieres  editions  latines  des  Opera  du  Pere  grec. 
Les  traductions  "humanistes"  imprimees  prennent  naissance  en  1507,  date  a 
laquelle  parait  le  Defide  orthodoxa  dans  la  version  de  Lefevre  d'Etaples.^  Get 
ouvrage  est  reedite  en  1512  avec  une  preface  et  un  commentaire  de  J.  Glich- 
tove.^  En  1514  parait  I'edition  venitienne  des  Opera  Damasceni,'^  composee  de 
traductions  medievales  et  humanistes.  Elle  contient  la  Dialectica  breuior,  le  De 
rebus  naturalibus  (!  =  Physica  de  Nicephore  Blemmydes),  les  deux  dans  la  tra- 
duction du  15^  siecle  d'Hilarion  de  Verone,^  les  Aphorismi  medicinae  [!]  sans 
nom  de  traducteur,  VIntroductio  dogmatum  elementaris  et  le  De  duabus  voluntatibus 
dans  la  version  de  Grosseteste.  Viennent  ensuite  quelques  cantiques  et  le  De 
fide  orthodoxa  traduit  par  Lefevre  d'Etaples,  mais  sans  le  commentaire  de  Glich- 
tove.  Cette  edition  n'a  jamais  connu  la  popularite  et  les  exemplaires  en  sont 
rarissimes. 

En  1535  parait  a  Bale  chez  H.  Petri  une  nouvelle  edition  latine  qui  est 
tout  a  fait  independante  de  I'edition  venitienne  de  1514,  mais  qui  reunit, 
elle  aussi,  des  traductions  medievales  et  humanistes.  Y  sont  contenus:  le  De 
fide  orthodoxa  dans  la  traduction  de  Lefevre  avec,  cette  fois-ci,  le  commentaire 
de  Clichtove,  le  De  his  qui  in  fide  dormierunt  traduit  par  Oecolampade  dans  les 
annees  1520,  Y Historia  Josaphat  et  Barlaam  dans  une  version  latine  du  12*^-13*^ 
siecle,  mais  qu'on  attribuait  alors  a  Georges  de  Trebizonde,  le  Demasceni  vita 
a  loanne  patriarcha  Hierosolymitano  lohanne  Oecolampadio  interprete,  les  Cantiques 
d'apres  leur  edition  de  1501  et  les  Fragmenta  Sententiarum  Damasceni  dans  la  tra- 
duction de  Pirckheymer.  Cette  edition  inchangee  est  reimprimee  en  1539.^ 


i8 


TRADUCTIONS  LATINES   DE  JEAN   DAMASCENE 


En  1544,  le  benedictin  frangais  Joachim  Perion  traduit  quelques  traites  de 
Damascene  a  partir  d'un  manuscrit  qui  lui  a  ete  prete  par  Jean  de  Gaigny 
et  dont  nous  parlerons  plus  bas.  Get  ouvrage  parait  a  Paris^  et  se  compose 
des  Primae  dogmatum  institutiones ,  du  De  duabus  voluntatibus  (auquel  est  rajoute 
un  fragment  du  traite  portant  le  meme  titre  de  Maxime  le  Confesseur)  et  du 
De  haeresibus. 

C'est  en  1546  que  parait  a  Cologne  chez  Petrus  Quentel  I'edition  la  plus 
complete  des  Oeuvres  latines  de  Damascene.^  Le  volume  comprend  La  vie 
de  Damascene  dans  la  traduction  d'Oecolampade,  le  De  philocosmis  sermo  sans  le 
nom  du  traducteur,  la  Dialectica  breuior,  le  De  introductione  dignitatum,  le  De  du- 
abus voluntatibus,  ces  trois  derniers  dans  la  traduction  de  Grosseteste,  et  dont 
I'editeur,  Henricus  Grauius,^  pretend  qu'ils  sont  "nunc  primum  typis  ex- 
cussi."  Ges  trois  traites  sont  suivis  du  De  fide  orthodoxa  dans  la  traduction  de 
Lefevre  d'Etaples  "avec  les  gloses  de  Lefevre  lui-meme!"^^  Ensuite  viennent 
"sed  et  tres  isti  proxime  sequentes,  nunc  primum  typis  excusi"  a  savoir:  les 
traductions  medievales  du  De  Trisagio,  du  De  centum  haeresibus  et  du  De  alter- 
catione  Christiani  et  Sarraceni.  Les  autres  traites  contenus  dans  le  volume  edite 
par  Grauius  sont  de  toute  evidence  repris  des  editions  baloises:  ce  sont  le 
Fragmentum  Sententiarum  ex  sermonibus  Damasceni,  interprete  Bilibaldo  Prickheymero , 
le  De  his  qui  in  fide  hinc  migrarunt  interprete  loanne  Oecolampadio,  le  Historiae  Bar- 
laam  ac  losaphat  liber  unus  et  les  Cantiques  qui  correspondent  a  ceux  imprimes 
dans  I'edition  de  1501.^^  Gontrairement  a  ce  que  pretend  Grauius,  son  edi- 
tion ne  contient  que  trois  traites  "nunc  primum  typis  excusi,"  a  savoir  le  De 
philocosmis,  le  De  Trisagio  et  le  De  altercatione  Christiani  et  Sarraceni.  Deux  remar- 
ques  s'imposent.  Premierement,  cinq  des  douze  traites  imprimes  ne  peuvent 
pas  etre  attribues  a  Jean  Damascene.  Deuxiemement,  il  y  a  lieu  de  sup- 
poser  que  Grauius  ne  connaissait  ni  I'edition  venitienne  de  1514,  ni  celle  de 
Perion  de  1544.  II  avait  toutefois  connaissance  de  I'edition  de  Verone  1531^^ 
(qui  contenait  uniquement  le  texte  grec  du  Defide  et  du  De  his  qui  in  fide  dor- 
mierunt),  puisqu'il  la  loue  dans  sa  preface.'^  De  plus,  il  insere  quelques-unes 
de  ses  legons  dans  les  marges  de  sa  propre  edition.  Quant  aux  editions  la- 
tines,  il  n'en  mentionne  aucune.  II  ne  dit  rien  non  plus  sur  la  provenance  des 
traductions  qu'il  a  fait  imprimer  et  se  contente  d'affirmer:  "Gum  autem  su- 
perioribus  annis  in  alia  quaedam  huius  viri  opuscula  eademque  latina  facta, 
incidissem  quorum  lectione  mire  delectatus  .  .  .  ego  tandem  .  .  .  nolui  diutius 
lucernam  hanc  sub  modio  occultari  ..."  [A2v.]. 

L'edition  des  Opera  de  Damascene  parue  a  Bale  en  1548  reunit  aussi  des 
traductions  du  Moyen-Age  et  des  traductions  "humanistes."  Pourtant,  les  tra- 
ductions ne  correspondent  pas  a  celles  imprimees  par  Grauius  en  1546.  De 
fait,  on  a  lieu  de  se  demander  si  cette  edition  ne  constitue  pas  une  replique 
aux  Opera  de  1546.  Ges  derniers  ne  sont  naturellement  pas  mentionnes  par 
I'editeur  balois,  Marcus  Hopper,  mais  le  contenu  de  son  volume  montre  qu'il 
s'agit  de  depasser  I'edition  de  Gologne.  En  tete  vient  le  Defide  orthodoxa  dans 


IRENA  BACKUS  IQ 

la  version  de  Lefevre.  Elle  est  accompagnee  du  texte  grec  repris  de  I'edition 
de  Verone  1531.  Le  commentaire  de  Clichtove,  reconnu  comme  tel,  est  im- 
prime  in  extenso.  Le  deuxieme  ouvrage  du  volume  est  le  De  his  qui  in  fide  dor- 
mierunt  traduit  par  Oecolampade,  accompagne  lui  aussi  du  texte  grec  de 
I'edition  1531.  Viennent  ensuite  les  traductions  faites  par  Perion  en  1544.  EUes 
sont  suivies  de  VEpistola  de  Trisagio,  du  De  altercatione  Christiani  et  Sarraceni  et  de 
la  Dialectica  breuior.  Ce  dernier  traite  est  bel  et  bien  dans  la  version  de  Gros- 
seteste,  mais  les  deux  autres  ne  correspondent  pas  aux  traductions  imprimees 
par  Grauius.  Les  Cantiques  et  YHistoria  losaphat  et  Barlaam  qui  achevent  le  vo- 
lume sont  repris  des  editions  baloises  precedentes.  Hopper  ignore  le  De  philo- 
cosmis  sermo  et  la  Vita  Damasceni  qui  figurent  chez  Grauius.  Par  contre,  il 
incorpore  apres  Perion,  le  fragment  du  traite  sur  les  deux  natures  par  Ma- 
xime  le  Confesseur. 

Notre  but  n'est  pas  d'evaluer  ici  toutes  les  traductions  qui  se  trouvent  dans 
ces  deux  editions.^*  Nous  allons  seulement  analyser  un  traite  authentique  de 
Jean  Damascene  qui  se  trouve  en  traduction  medievale  chez  Grauius  et  en 
traduction  de  genre  "humaniste"  chez  Hopper.  Notre  choix  s'est  arrete  sur 
le  De  duabus  voluntatibus  pour  les  raisons  suivantes:  (1)  II  n'y  a  aucun  doute  que 
la  version  publiee  par  Grauius  soit  celle  de  Robert  Grosseteste  et  nous  avons 
done  affaire  a  un  bon  exemple  de  la  methode  ad  verbum  tardive. ^^  Cela  si- 
gnifie  que  Ton  peut  tres  facilement  reconstruire  le  texte  grec  a  partir  de  la 
version  latine.  (2)  Nous  connaissons  le  manuscrit  grec  utilise  par  Perion  pour 
sa  traduction  de  Damascene.*^  (3)  Le  De  duabus  constitue  une  expression  de 
la  christologie  de  Demascene  — sa  doctrine  fondamentale.  Ces  traductions  la- 
tines  devraient  done  fournir  un  bon  exemple  de  la  maniere  dont  Grosseteste 
et  Perion  ont  compris  la  pensee  du  Pere  grec.  De  fait,  nous  tacherons  ici 
de  donner  des  elements  de  reponse  a  deux  questions  precises:  (1)  Que  de- 
vient  le  texte  grec  chez  les  deux  traducteurs?  (2)  Est-ce  que  les  modifications 
eventuelles  du  texte  ont  pour  but  de  clarifier  la  pensee  de  Damascene?  II  con- 
vient  de  noter  qu'a  priori,  tout  procede  de  modification  serait  a  exclure  chez 
un  traducteur  qui  suit  la  methode  de  verbo  ad  verbum.  Par  contre  Perion,  defen- 
deur  acharne  de  la  methode  de  traduction  paraphrasante,^^  devrait  demon- 
trer  un  certain  manque  de  respect  pour  son  texte  et  une  forte  tendance  a  faire 
ressortir  la  doctrine  de  Damascene  telle  qu'il  la  comprend.  Voici  sa  propre 
definition  de  la  bonne  methode  de  traduction:  "haec  duo  tenenda  esse  ne- 
cessario:  vnum,  vt  verbum  ex  verbo  exprimendum  non  putemus:  alterum,  vt 
graeca  cum  latinis  maxime  Ciceronis  eiusdem  generis  fere  coniungamus."  II 
souligne  aussi  I'importance  du  genre  litteraire:  "Quod  si  plane  sic  verterem 
Platonem  aut  Aristotelem  vt  verterunt  nostri  poetae  fabulas,  male,  credo,  me- 
rerer,  de  meis  ciuibus."'^^ 

Notre  hypoth^se  correspond-elle  aux  faits?  Commengons  par  une  esquisse 
des  caracteristiques  generales  du  texte  grec  du  De  duabus  voluntatibus  dont  il 
existe  d'ailleurs  I'edition  critique  de  Kotter.  ^®  Nous  ne  savons  rien  sur  le  ma- 


20  TRADUCTIONS   LATINES   DE  JEAN   DAMASCENE 

nuscrit  grec  qui  a  servi  de  base  pour  la  traduction  de  Grosseteste.  Toutefois, 
il  est  clair  qu'il  appartenait  au  meme  groupe  que  celui  utilise  par  Perion.  Kot- 
ter,  dans  son  edition  (p.  172),  considere  a  juste  titre  que  les  importantes  va- 
riantes  dans  le  texte  du  traite  laissent  supposer  "dafi  eine  Uberarbeitung  des 
Textes  stattgefunden  hat  und  zwar  wie  ich  annehme,  durch  den  Autor  selbst. 
Dabei  ist  der  Texte  der  Sippe  a  (Zeugen  D  +  J  des  kritischen  Apparates)  als 
die  verbesserte  Form  des  Textus  receptus  (r  =  die  restlichen  Zeugen)  zu  be- 
trachten."  Or,  le  manuscrit  de  Perion,  signale  par  B  chez  Kotter,  appartient 
au  groupe  r  et  les  differences  d'avec  le  texte  de  Grosseteste  (tel  que  Ton  peut 
le  reconstruire  d'apres  sa  traduction)  sont  dues  uniquement  aux  variantes  a 
I'interieur  du  textus  receptus.  Quant  a  la  division  du  texte  en  chapitres,  con- 
trairement  a  la  supposition  de  Kotter,^  I'edition  de  Grauius  est  la  seule  a  I'a- 
dopter  au  16^  siecle.  Sa  division  ne  correspond  d'ailleurs  pas  a  la  division 
moderne  et  on  ne  peut  I'attribuer  qu'a  Grauius  lui-meme.  A  notre  connais- 
sance,  tous  les  manuscrits  de  la  traduction  de  Grosseteste^^  ainsi  que  I'edition 
venitienne  (dont  Kotter  ignorait  qu'elle  contenait  le  texte  du  De  duabus)  re- 
produisent  le  traite  en  bloc.  II  en  va  de  meme  pour  la  presentation  de  Perion 
qui  est  reproduite  par  Hopper  en  1548. 

Quant  au  manuscrit  B  de  Kotter  que  Perion  avait  utilise,  celui-ci  est  bien 
connu.  Le  benedictin  le  decrit  d'ailleurs  lui-meme  dans  sa  preface  adressee 
a  "Franciscus  Burgius  Riuorum  pontifex,"  oii  il  souligne  aussi  qu'il  a  traduit 
les  trois  traites,  afin  de  refuter  les  doctrines  de  la  Reforme.  Curieusement, 
cette  preface  est  imprimee  in  extenso  par  Hopper.  En  voici  le  passage  qui  con- 
cerne  notre  manuscrit:  "...  librum  quendam  perantiquum  ex  beati  Hilarii  Pic- 
tauiensis  bibliotheca  loamnes  Ganeius,^^  singulari  et  virtute  et  doctrina  vir, 
vtendum  dedit.  Quern  cum,  vt  fit,  diligenter  euoluerem,  in  Damasceni  quae- 
dam  opuscula  incidi  quae  e  Graeco  in  Latinum  adhuc  conuersa  non  fuerunt" 
[Hopper  433!].  Le  manuscrit  date  en  fait  du  12^  siecle  et  appartint  d'abord  a 
I'abbaye  de  S.  Hilaire  de  Poitiers,  puis  aux  Dominicains  de  cette  meme 
ville.^^  (II  n'est  done  nullement  question  d'un  manuscrit  provenant  de  la  bi- 
bliotheque  de  S.  Hilaire  lui-meme!).  II  est  conserve  aujourd'hui  a  la  Bi- 
bliotheque  Nationale  de  Paris  sous  la  cote  MS.  grec  supplement  8.  A  part 
les  traites  traduits  par  Perion,  il  contient  la  Dialectica  breuior  et  le  Defide  ortho- 
doxa'^  qui,  a  la  difference  des  traites  qu'il  a  traduit,  ne  sont  pas  mentionnes 
dans  la  preface  du  benedictin.  II  y  a  lieu  de  se  demander  quelle  "conuersio" 
de  la  Dialectica  etait  connue  de  Perion  en  1544?  Certainement  pas  celle  pu- 
bliee  en  1514,  puisqu'il  considere  les  Primae  institutiones  et  le  De  duabus  comme 
"adhuc  non  conuersa!" 

Quant  aux  traductions  elles-memes,  celle  de  Grosseteste,  comme  nous  le 
verrons,  presente  peu  de  suprises.  La  version  de  Perion,  par  contre,  est  ca- 
racterisee  par  un  manque  de  consistance  en  ce  qui  concerne  son  attitude  en- 
vers  le  texte  grec.  Tantot,  sans  soustraire  ou  rajouter  a  son  original,  il  en  change 
completement  le  sens.  Tantot,  il  supplee  aux  lacunes  du  B  en  I'ameliorant. 


IRENA   BACKUS  21 

Tantot,  il  rajoute  et  soustrait  des  mots  a  son  original,  afm  de  le  rendre  plus 
comprehensible.  II  suit  ces  procedes  de  maniere  tout  a  fait  arbitraire.  II  se- 
rait  faux  de  dire  qu'il  impose  sa  propre  doctrine  sur  le  traite  de  Damascene. 
Prenons  un  exemple  de  chacun  des  trois  procedes. 

Dans  le  chapitre  8  (selon  la  numerotation  moderne),  Damascene,  en  demon- 
trant  qu'il  y  a  deux  natures  en  Christ,  dit  qu'une  nature  admettant  plusieurs 
defmitions  (p. ex  divinite  et  humanite)  ne  peut  pas  etre  une  nature  simple. 
II  faut  qu'elle  soit  composee  et  sa  defmition  le  sera  aussi.  De  ce  fait,  une  na- 
ture ne  peut  pas  etre  consubstantielle  avec  une  autre,  et  une  hypostase  ap- 
partenant  a  une  nature  ne  peut  pas  etre  consubstantielle  avec  une  hypostase 
appartenant  a  une  autre  nature.  Si  le  Christ  n'a  qu'une  seule  nature,  com- 
ment peut-il  etre  consubstantiel  avec  son  Pere  et  sa  mere?  Voici  le  texte  grec: 
[Kotter  189] 

Kat  TTOcXtv,  Mia  xai  t|  auTrj  9uai(;  exepoouaioi?  6[xoouaiO(; 

eivai  ou  Buvaxai.  Kai  ttocXiv.  Ougk;  (puaet  6(jLoouaio? 

ou  Xeyexai  ou8e  UTcoaxaat;  (jLovo9uri?  exepoouaiOK;  UTToaxaaeatv  opioouaio?. 

La  traduction  de  Grosseteste  est  tout  a  fait  litterale:  [Grauius  51]  "Et  rursus: 
vna  et  eadem  natura  his  quae  alterius  substantiae,  consubstantialis  esse  non 
potest.  Et  rursus:  natura  naturae  consubstantialis  non  dicitur,  neque  hypo- 
stasis vnius  naturae,  his  quae  alterius  substantiae  hypostasibus  consubstantialis." 

Le  manuscrit  grec  de  Perion  est  le  seul  a  omettre  elvai  ou  Suvaxai  .  .  .  ofxoou- 
atO(;.  II  s'agit  d'un  simple  oubli.  Le  benedictin  ne  touche  pas  a  son  texte  de 
base,  tout  en  le  paraphrasant  ainsi:  [Hopper  531]  "Praeterea,  cum  vna  eademque 
natura,  eiusdem  essentiae,  cuius  sunt  diuersae  essentiae  et  naturae,  non  di- 
catur,  nee  vnius  personae  natura  eiusdem  essentiae  esse  dicatur,  cuius  sunt 
personae  diuersae  essentiae.  ..." 

La  pensee  de  Damascene  est  faussee.  Au  lieu  de  dire:  "une  nature  ne  peut 
pas  etre  de  la  meme  substance  qu'une  autre,  de  meme  qu'une  hypostase  ne 
peut  etre  consubstantielle  avec  une  autre,  si  elles  n'appartiennent  pas  toutes 
deux  a  la  meme  nature,"  le  Pere  grec,  selon  Perion,  affirme:  "une  nature 
composee  des  essences  diverses  ne  peut  pas  etre  d'une  seule  et  meme  essence, 
et  la  nature  d'un  individu  n'est  pas  d'une  seule  et  meme  essence,  si  cet  in- 
dividu  appartient  aux  diverses  natures."  Le  Christ  aurait  done  non  seulement 
deux  natures,  mais  aussi  deux  personnes. 

Dans  d'autres  cas,  Perion  s'avere  capable  d'ameliorer  son  texte  et  de  le  tra- 
duire  sans  en  changer  le  sens.  Dans  le  chapitre  6  [numerotation  moderne,  Kot- 
ter 180  col. A],  Jean  Damascene,  en  parlant  des  caracteristiques  individuelles, 
en  donne  illustration  suivante: 

ouxe  Tra;  avGpcoTio^  X£ux6^  aXX'  6  \kiv  X£ux6(;,  6  hi  (i£Xa?,  6  hi  aix6xpou?. 
Grosseteste  [Grauius  49]  traduit  la  phrase  par  "Neque  omnis  homo  albus,  sed 
hie  quidem  albus,  hie  autem  niger,  hie  autem  flauus."  B,  le  manuscrit  de  Perion, 
omet  aXX'  6  (xiv  X6ux6?  par  erreur.  Et,  cette  fois-ci,  Perion,  tout  en  corri- 


22  TRADUCTIONS  LATINES  DE  JEAN  DAMASCENE 

geant  son  texte  grec,  transmet  fidelement  la  pensee  de  Damascene  par  sa  tra- 
duction: "Neque  omnis  homo  est  candidus,  sed  hie  albus,  niger  ille,  alius  inter 
hos  temperatus"  [Hopper  530].  Remarquons  qu'il  aurait  tres  bien  pu  traduire 
le  texte  tel  qu'il  I'avait  sous  les  yeux  par  "Neque  omnis  homo  est  candidus. 
Hie  autem  niger  est,  alius  flauus"  ou  par  une  formule  semblable. 

De  tels  cas  d'aimelioration  sont  rares  chez  Perion.  Par  contre,  on  remarque 
chez  lui  une  tendance  a  modifier  carrement  son  texte  en  y  rajoutant  ou  en 
y  substituant  des  mots  et  en  en  changeant  la  ponctuation.  Un  exemple  par- 
ticulierement  frappant  de  ce  procede  se  trouve  de  nouveau  dans  le  chapitre 
8  [Kotter  p.  190].  II  s'agit  de  la  phrase  suivante:  Kai  ttocXiv.  Et  (xta  9601?  xou 
XptoTOU  (xexot  TTiv  evcoatv,  7iW(;  ovofxaCexat;  Xpicnovric;  hfikaZri  r\  0eav0pco7i:6'nri(;. 
Iloia  cpuaei;  Et  (jiia,  BtjXovoti  tt)  [aioc  autou  cpuaet.  OuxoOv  r\  OeavOpcoTtoxT)? 
auTOU,  xai  eaxai  r\  Iv  Xpiaxw  Geonr);  TuaGriTT).  (II  n'y  a  pas  de  variantes  tex- 
tuelles).  Grosseteste  [Grauius  51]  en  donne  la  traduction  suivante:  "Et  rursus: 
si  vna  natura  Christi  post  vnionem  quomodo  non  [!]  nominatur  Christitas  vi- 
delicet diuina  humanitas?  Quali  natura?  Si  vna,  manifestum  quoniam  in  vna 
ipsius  natura.  Igitur  diuina  humanitas  ipsius,  et  erit  quae  in  Christo  deltas 
passibilis."  Le  rajout  du  non  doit  etre  attribue  a  une  corruption,  dans  certains 
manuscrits,  de  la  traduction  de  Grosseteste.  Cette  particule  figure  aussi  dans 
I'edition  venitienne  de  1514,  mais  elle  est  absente  du  MS.  Paris  BN  Lat.  2375 
[fol.  37 ir.]  temoin  de  la  version  de  Grosseteste  datant  du  14^  siecle.  Toute- 
fois,  ce  meme  manuscrit,  ainsi  que  les  versions  imprimees  de  1514  et  de  1546 
comportent  I'erreur  qui  consiste  a  mettre  le  point  d'interrogation  apres  diuina 
humanitas  (0eav0pco7c6TTi(;)  et  non  apres  nominatur  (dvotAOcCexai).  Ce  defaut  mis 
a  part,  la  traduction  de  Grosseteste  est  litterale  au  point  d'etre  inintelligible. 
Elle  ne  fait  pas  ressortir  ce  que  Damascene  ici  s'efforce  de  souligner,  a  savoir: 
si  le  Christ  ne  possede  qu'une  seule  nature,  alors  il  n'a  souffert  qu'en  une  seule 
nature.  C'est  la  "divinite-humaine"  qui  a  souffert,  et  des  lors  la  divinite  du 
Christ  doit  etre  consideree  comme  corruptible. 

La  traduction  que  donne  Perion  de  ce  passage  falsifie  le  texte  grec  et  ne 
s'avere  guere  plus  claire  que  celle  de  son  predecesseur.  [Hopper  531]:  "Prae- 
terea,  si  vna  est  Christi  natura  post  coniunctionem,  quomodo  benignitas  no- 
minatur? Nempe  Dei  hominisque  coniunctio.  Qua  tandem  natura?  Si  vna  est, 
non  est  dubium  quin  vna  eius  natura.  Non  igitur  eius  [naturae:  sous-entendu] 
diuina  cum  homine  coniunctio  et  quae  in  Christo  est,  patietur  diuinitas." 

La  syntaxe  du  grec  n'est  pas  suivie.  Quant  a  benignitas  au  lieu  de  christitas 
(Xpriaxonri?  au  lieu  de  xpwc6xir)(;),  soit  Perion  avait  tous  simplement  mal  lu  son 
manuscrit,  soit  il  a  fait  expres  d'y  substituer  le  terme  plus  courant  en  se  trou- 
vant  en  difficulte  devant  la  'xpi<yz6vr\(;  de  Damascene.  Or,  benignitas  ne  pou- 
vait  pas  se  rapporter  a  la  reponse  dans  laquelle  il  est  uniquement  question 
de  la  divinite  et  de  Vhumanite,  et  cela  explique  le  changement  de  ponctuation 
effectue  par  Perion.  Ce  changement  fait  qu'au  lieu  de  dire  que  "la  nature  unique 
du  Christ  devrait  s'appeller  Christitas  ou  humanite-divine,"  Damascene  dit  que 
"si  le  Christ  n'a  qu'une  nature,  alors  la  bonte  divine  doit  s'appeller  Dei  homi- 


IRENA  BACKUS 


23 


nisque  coniunctio ,''  c'est-a-dire  Tunion  hypostatique!  Tout  aussi  etonnant  est  le 
raj  out  du  non  dans  la  derniere  phrase  citee.  Perion  avait  de  toute  evidence 
quelque  peine  a  comprendre  la  pensee  de  son  auteur  et  il  I'a  finadement  in- 
terpretee  de  la  maniere  suivante:  "Si  le  Christ  n'a  qu'une  nature,  2ilors  il  n'y 
a  pas  d'union  divine  entre  cette  nature  humaine,  ce  qui  veut  dire  que  la  di- 
vinite  du  Christ  est  corruptible."  Perion  n'a  pas  su  referer  les  termes  XP^*^' 
TOTT)?  et  0eav0pa)7c6T)r)(;  a  la  nature  unique  du  Christ.  II  en  a  done  supprime 
un  et  a  traduit  I'autre  par  Dei  hominisque  coniunctio,  autrement  dit  I'union  hypo- 
statique au  sens  orthodoxe  du  terme.  Notons  qu'il  n'a  pas  hesite  a  modifier 
son  texte  grec  jusqu'a  ce  qu'il  corresponde  a  son  interpretation. 

Que  conclure  de  notre  analyse  partielle?  Grosseteste,  quelques  erreurs  mises 
a  part,  suit  son  original  mot  a  mot,  en  conformite  avec  la  tradition  de  verbo 
ad  verbum.  II  en  resulte  que  sa  traduction  s'avere  souvent  incomprehensible. 
Perion,  en  suivant  la  methode  paraphrasante,  ne  fait  preuve  d'aucun  respect 
pour  son  original.  Meme  s'il  reprend  certains  passages  du  grec  sans  faire  de 
rajouts  ou  d'omissions,  il  y  impose  des  interpretations  arbitraires.  Face  aux 
difficultes  de  traduction  il  n'hesite  pas  a  changer  son  original,  afm  que  celui- 
ci  corresponde  au  sens  souhaite.  Parfois  pourtant,  il  se  montre  capable  de  sup- 
pleer  aux  lacunes  dans  son  texte,  afm  d'en  faire  ressortir  le  vrai  sens.  Comme 
I'a  demontre  notre  troisieme  exemple,  Perion  n'a  pas  I'air  de  comprende  la 
doctrine  des  deux  natures  de  Damascene.  II  y  impose  une  doctrine  qui,  selon 
lui,  devrait  etre  celle  du  Pere  grec.  Notons  aussi  que  le  probleme  de  la  relation 
entre  I'original  et  la  tr2iduction  ne  preoccupe  pas  Perion  dans  son  De  Optimo 
genere  interpretandi.  Comme  nous  I'avons  vu,  il  s'y  concentre  surtout  sur  le  vo- 
cabulaire  et  la  maniere  dont  on  devrait  le  traduire  selon  le  genre  litteraire 
de  I'ouvrage  en  question. 

En  ce  qui  concerne  le  De  duabus  voluntatibus ,  le  lecteur  de  I'edition  baloise 
des  Opera  Damasceni  aurait  ete  confronte  a  une  traduction  tout  aussi  peu  in- 
telligible *  que  le  lecteur  de  I'edition  de  Cologne. 


Notes 


1.  Voir  Saint  John  Damascene,  Deftde  orthodoxa.  Versions  of  Burgundio  and  Cerbanus, 
ed  E.M.  Buytaert,  O.F.M.,  Franciscan  Institute  Publications,  text  series  no.  8,  St. 
Bonaventure,  N.Y.  1955;  S.H.  Thomson,  The  Writings  of  Robert  Grosseteste,  Bishop  of  Lin- 
coln, Cambridge  1940;  notre  artide,  John  of  Damascus.  "Deftde  orthodoxa":  Translations  by 
Burgundio  (1153-54),  Grosseteste  (1235-40)  and  Lefevre  d'Etaples  (1507),  sous  presse  dans 
le  Journal  of  the  Warburg  and  Courtauld  Institutes. 

2 .  Contenta:  Theologia  Damasceni.  I.  De  ineffabili  diuinitate.  II.  De  creaturarum  genesi  ordine 
Moseos.  III.  De  iis  que  post  resurrectionem  vsque  ad  vniuersalem  resurrectionem,  Parisiis,  H.  Ste- 
phanos, 1507,  V.  aussi  n.(l)  ci-dessus, 

3.  In  hoc  opere  contenta:  Theologia  Damasceni  quatuor  libris  explicata  et  adiecto  ad  litteram  com- 
mentario  [I.  Clichtouei]  elucidata  .  .  .  Pzirisiis,  ex  off.  H.  Stephani,  1512. 


24  TRADUCTIONS  LATINES   DE  JEAN   DAMASCENE 

4.  Sancti  loannis  Damasceni  ntisquam  formis  pressa  doctiore  ore  quam  Minerue  composita  opera 
vulgo,  Venetiis,  per  Lazarum  de  Soardis,  1514. 

5.  Pour  plus  de  renseignements,  voir  notre  article  yoAn  of  Damascus,  "Dialectica  breu- 
ior":  the  pro-Monophysite  version  in  the  translation  of  Hilarion  of  Verona,  sous  presse  dans  la 
Revue  d'Etudes  Augustiniennes . 

6.  lohannis  Damasceni  opera  .  .  .  iam  iterum  graecorum  exemplarium  collatione  castigata.  .  .  . 
Basileae,  H.  Petrus  1539. 

7.  loannis  Manduri  monachi  Damasceni  primae  do gmatum  institutiones  .  .  .  loachimo  Perionio 
Benedictino  Cormoeriaceno  interprete,  Parisiis,  ex  off.  J.  L.  Tiletani,  1544. 

8.  Sancti  Pairis  loannis  Damasceni,  philosophi  pariter  et  theologi  sua  tempore  facile  summi,  vniuersa 
quae  obtineri  hac  vice  potuerunt  opera,  summo  Henrici  Grauii  studio  partim  ex  tenebris  ac  situ  eruta, 
partim  cum  graecis  exemplaribus  mature  collata,  quorum  ordo  seu  numerus  est.  .  .  .  Coloniae,  ex 
off.  Petri  Quentel,  1546. 

9.  Dominicain  de  Cologne.  Voir  a  son  propos:  F.  J.  Quetif  et  J.  Echard,  Scriptores 
ordinis  praedicatorum,  II,  Lutetiae  Parisiorum  1721,  140ss. 

10.  Voici  la  description  figurant  sur  la  page  de  titre:  "De  Fide  orthodoxa  libri  IIII 
interprete  Fabro  Stapulensi,  cuius  et  scholiis  iidem  illustrantur."  En  fait,  il  s'agit  du 
commentaire  de  Clichtove  abrege  par  Grauius  lui-meme. 

11.  loannis  Damasceni  in  Theogoniam  hymnus,  s.l.,  1501. 

12.  'IQANNOY  TOY  AAMASKHNOT  "EKAOSIS  .  .  .  loannis  Damasceni  editio  Or- 
thodoxaefidei.  Eiusdem  de  iis  qui  in  fide  dormierunt,  Veronae  1531  (apud  Stephanum  et  fra- 
tres  Sabios). 

13.  A2v.:  "Quanquam  illud  non  tam  clare  ex  Latina  traductione  quam  ex  Graeco 
opere  emicat,  quod  nuper  diuino  beneficio  ad  studiosorum  manus  peruenisse,  mag- 
nopere  gaudemus." 

14.  Nous  comptons  toutefois  le  faire  dans  une  monographic  que  nous  sommes  en 
train  de  preparer  et  qui  s'intitule  Some  Mediaeval  and  Renaissance  Latin  Translations  of  the 
Greek  Fathers:  Justin  Martyr,  Basil  of  Caesarea,  John  of  Damascus. 

15.  Generalement  sur  cette  methode  v.  L.  Minio-Pauello,  lacobus  Veneticus  Graecus, 
Canonist  and  Translator  of  Aristotle  in  Traditio  8  (1952),  265-304. 

16.  Of.  Die  Schriften  des  Johannes  von  Damaskos,  hgb.  vom  Byzantinischen  Institut  der 
Abtei  Scheyern,  Bd.  IV  besorgt  von  B.  Kotter,  162ff.  qui  donne  les  legons  de  ce  MS. 

17.  Cf.  p. ex.  De  Optimo  genere  interpretandi  commentarii,  Parisiis,  apudj.  Tiletanum  1540. 
Sur  Perion,  generalement  voir  A.  Stegmann,  Les  observations  sur  Aristote  du  benedictin 

J.  Perion  in:  Platon  et  Aristote  a  la  Renaissance,  16^  Coll.  International  de  Tours,  Paris  1976, 
377-89  (De  Petrarque  a  Descartes,  t.32). 
17a.  De  optimo  genere  A4r,,  A3r, 

18.  Cf.  n.l5  ci-dessus. 

19.  P.  160:  "In  den  Hss.  fmdet  sich  keine  Kapitelzahlung.  Abgesehen  von  der  Aus- 
gabe  von  1546  (auch  1544  und  1548?),  wo  der  Text  in  Kapitel  eingeteilt  und  danach 
gezahlt  ist,  gliedern  die  nachsten  Drucke  bis  1603  ihren  Text  iiberhaupt  nicht." 

20.  Cf.  Thomson,  50. 

21.  Jean  de  Gaigny.  V.  J.  K.  Farge,  Biographical  Register  of  Paris  Doctors  of  Theology 
1500-1536,  Toronto  1980,  177-83. 

22.  V.  p. ex  Henri  Omont,  Inventaire  sommaire  des  manuscrits  grecs  de  la  Bibliotheque  Na- 
tional, III,  Paris  1888,  202. 

23.  Ainsi  que  les  oeuvres  de  Ps.-Denys.  V.  Omont,  III,  202. 

24.  Perion  etait  d'ailleurs  severement  critique  comme  traducteur  deja  de  son  vi- 
vant.  V.  son  Aristotelis  de  natura  aut  de  reason  principiis  libri  octo.  .  .  .  Basileae,  loh.  Opo- 
rinus  1552,  259ss.  qui  comporte  les  details  de  la  polemique  a  ce  sujet  entre  Perion 
lui-meme  et  L.  Strebaeus. 


Lactantius  Placidus'  Commentary 
on  the  Thebaid 

Paul  M.  Clogan 

The  commentary  of  Lactantius  Placidus  on  the  Thebaid  of  Statius  is 
one  of  the  earliest  commentaries  on  the  classics  that  deeply  influenced 
the  tradition  of  medieval  mythography.  Composed  as  a  commen- 
tary in  the  fifth  or  sixth  century  and  modeled  on  the  scholia  of  Servius,  it  cir- 
culated widely  during  the  early  Middle  Ages  in  northern  France  and  central 
Germany  as  both  commentary  and  as  marginal  scholia  accompanying  the  text 
of  the  Thebaid.  During  the  early  Italian  Renaissance,  it  attracted  new  interest, 
and  judging  from  the  numerous  fifteenth-century  manuscripts,  reached  its  peak 
in  popularity.  But  not  too  much  is  known  about  the  commentator.  He  has  been 
variously  identified  as  a  Christian  or  Mithraistic  Neoplatonist  from  Africa, 
Gaul,  or  Spain  living  in  the  fifth  or  sixth  century.  One  critic  would  date  Lac- 
tantius Placidus  as  a  late  fourth-century  commentator  who  wrote  in  the  period 
between  Donatus  and  Servius.^  He  is  not  to  be  identified  with  Luctatius  Pla- 
cidus, the  grammarian  who  compiled  a  glossary  on  Plautus  and  Terence.  In 
some  manuscripts,  he  is  confused  with  the  Church  Father,  Caecilius  Lactan- 
tius; it  is  not  certain  whether  the  name  of  the  patristic  writer  is  a  scribal  error 
or  a  pseudonym  chosen  by  the  commentator.  In  addition  to  his  commentary 
on  the  Thebaid,  he  has  been  assigned  a  commentary  on  the  Achilleid  (which  is 
sometimes  found  with  his  commentary  on  the  Thebaid),  the  Argumenta  Meta- 
morphoseon  Ovidii,  and  the  De  Ave  Phoenice,  all  on  very  dubious  grounds. 

The  manuscript  and  textual  traditions  of  Lactantius  Placidus'  commentary 
on  the  Thebaid  have  never  been  properly  studied.  The  editions  of  the  text  of 
the  commentary  — based  on  one,  two,  or  a  few  poorly  selected  manuscripts  — 
have  been  uncritical  and  far  from  definitive.  It  was  first  printed  in  Milan  in 
1475-1478  by  Boninus  Mombritius,  who  apparently  edited  an  Italian  man- 
uscript. All  the  reprints  during  the  fifteenth  century  (Rome  1475,  Venice  1483 
by  Octavius  Scotus,  Venice  1490  by  Jacobus  de  Paganinis,  Venice  1494  by 
Bartholomaeus  de  Zanis,  Venice  1498  by  Petrus  de  Quarengiis,  respectively) 
are  derived  from  the  Milan  edition  of  Boninus  Mombritius.  In  his  Paris  edi- 


26  LACTANTIUS  PLASIDUS  ON  THE  THEBAID 

tion  of  1600,  Friedrich  Lindenbrog  did  litde  more  than  re-edited  the  text  with 
the  help  of  two  new  manuscripts  which  are  now  lost.  Caspar  von  Barth,  who 
in  his  Zwickau  edition  of  1664  claimed  to  have  edited  other  scholia  to  Statius, 
unfortunately  or  fortunately  lost  his  manuscripts  and  notes  in  a  fire;  and  scho- 
lars have  been  reluctant  to  accept  his  testimony  regarding  the  existence  of  the 
ancient  scholia. 

Not  until  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth  century  did  there  appear  a  series  of 
articles  on  the  scholia  to  Statius  which  revealed  for  the  first  time  other,  older, 
and  better  manuscripts  of  Lactantius  Placidus.  Eduard  Wolfflin  identified  three 
eleventh-century  manuscripts  (Monacensis  Clm.  6396  and  19482,  and  Bam- 
bergensis  Class.  47),^  and  Philipp  Kohlmann,  who  was  working  on  a  new  edi- 
tion of  the  Statius  scholia,  noted  the  eleventh-century  Parisinus  10317,  whose 
scholia  he  published,  and  the  fifteenth-century  Parisinus  8064.^  Then  in  1898 
Richard  Jahnke  published  the  long  awaited  Teubner  edition  of  Lactantius  Pla- 
cidus' commentary  on  the  Thebaid  and  the  anonymous  commentary  on  Statius' 
Achilleid  ascribed  to  Lactantius  Placidus  and  sometimes  found  in  manuscripts 
with  his  commentary  on  the  Thebaid.^  For  his  edition,  Jahnke  collated  Mo- 
nacensis Clm.  6396  and  19482,  Parisinus  8063,  8064,  10317,  Bambergensis 
Class.  47,  Kassel  164,  Guidianus  54,  and  the  old  edition  of  Friedrich  Lin- 
denbrog. Yet  reviewers  rightfully  found  the  Teubner  edition  of  Lactantius  Pla- 
cidus disappointing.  Jahnke  did  not  utilize  certain  older  manuscripts,  gave 
a  poor  collation  of  Parisinus  8063  and  8064,  and  failed  to  examine  carefully 
the  relationship  of  the  manuscripts.  Disappointed  with  Jahnke's  edition,  scho- 
lars for  a  while  continued  to  search  out  and  examine  older  and  better  man- 
uscripts. In  1902,  Max  Manitius,  who  reported  on  his  examination  of  the 
Dresden  MS.  Dc  156,  conjectured  that  the  original  scholia  of  Lactantius  Pla- 
cidus were  fuller  than  the  extant  versions  or  that  another  group  of  Thebaid  scho- 
lia at  one  time  may  have  been  combined  with  extracts  from  Lactantius 
Placidus.^  In  1908,  Alfred  Klotz  published  the  results  of  his  careful  study  of 
"Die  Statiusscholien,"^  and  in  1915  Gino  FunaioH  noted  for  the  first  time  the 
existence  and  importance  of  Valentinianus  394,  the  oldest  manuscript  of  Lac- 
tantius Placidus.^  Finally  in  1940,  Paul  van  de  Woestijne  published  his  col- 
lation of  parts  of  Valentinianus  394,  and  suggested  that  the  scholia  in  older 
manuscripts  are  mainly  in  the  tradition  of  Lactantius  Placidus,  but  do  not  fol- 
low exclusively  the  text  in  any  of  the  manuscripts  he  conisdered.^ 

Yet  my  search  for  manuscripts  in  European  libraries  shows  that  there  are 
at  least  forty-two  extant  manuscripts  of  Lactantius  Placidus'  commentary  on 
the  Thebaid,  many  of  them  offering  complete  texts,  and  one  dating  from  the 
ninth  century.  As  a  first  step  toward  the  study  of  the  manuscript  tradition  of 
Lactantius  Placidus'  commentary,  the  following  annotated  list  of  extant  man- 
uscripts should  be  useful  to  scholars. ^^  In  the  necessarily  brief  description  of 
the  manuscripts,  I  give  the  present  shelf  mark  and  sometimes  the  former  shelf 
marks,  the  approximate  date  of  the  copy,  and  the  number  of  folios  of  the  com- 


PAUL   M.    CLOGAN  27 

mentary.  The  annotation  is  usually  a  select  reference  to  a  catalogue  or  a  par- 
ticular study  which  offers  additional  description  and  information.  I  indicate 
whether  the  manuscript  contains  the  commentary  only  or  presents  it  as  mar- 
ginzd  scholia  on  the  text  of  the  Thebaid.  I  include  in  the  list  fragments  and  cer- 
tain substantial  excerpts  of  the  ancient  commentary,  but  I  exclude  purely 
medieval  interpolations  in  the  form  of  brief  marginal  and  interlinear  glosses/^ 
An  asterisk  signifies  that  I  have  not  seen  the  manuscript  and  have  relied  upon 
microfilms,  photostats,  printed  and  handwritten  catalogue  descriptions,  and 
the  correspondence  of  librarians.  Otherwise,  I  have  examined  the  manuscript 
"on  location."  The  list,  however,  is  preliminary  and  does  not  purpose  to  be 
complete.  Information  regarding  manuscript  collections  in  Poland,  Hungary, 
Czechoslovakia,  Eastern  Germany,  and  Russia  — once  and  perhaps  still  very 
rich  in  Latin  manuscripts  —  is  not  easily  obtainable.  Only  recently,  certain  col- 
lections in  Eastern  and  Western  Germany,  which  were  dislocated  during  World 
War  II,  have  been  returned,  in  most  cases,  to  their  proper  libraries.  Yet  in 
itself  the  list  does  reveal  the  existence  and  diffusion  of  the  earliest  commentary 
on  a  classical  author  containing  ancient,  critical,  and  interpretative  material 
that  deeply  influenced  the  tradition  of  medieval  mythography. 

North  Texas  State  University 


♦Bamberg.  Staatliche  Bibliothek,  MS  Class.  47  (M.  IV.  11),  s.  XI,  fols.  1-93. 
Thebaid  With  marginal  scholia  of  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See  Eduard  Wolfflin, 
Philologus,  [1866]  24:  156-58;  Philipp  Kohlmann,  ed.,  Thebais,  Leipzig,  1884, 
p.  x;  Otto  Miiller,  "Aus  alten  Handschriften  des  Statius  III,"  Wochenschrift 
fur  klassische  Philologie,  20  (1903):  196-97;  and  G.  Funaioli,  Studi  Italiani  di 
Fililogia  Classica,  21,  1915,  65-73. 

*Bern.  Biirgerbibliothek,  MS  A  91,  n°  6,  s.  X-XI,  fol.  l-T.  (Institut  de  Re- 
cherche et  d'Histoire  des  Textes.) 

♦Brussels.  Bibliotheque  Royale,  MS.  lat.  1723,  s.  XV,  fols.  1-179\  Thebaid 
with  marginal  scholia  from  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See  P.  Thomas,  Catalogue 
des  manuscrits  de  classiques  latins  de  la  Bibliotheque  Royale  de  Bruxelles,  Ghent, 
1896,  no.  11;  and  Joseph  Bidez  and  Franz  Cumont,  Les  Mages  Hellenises, 
Paris,  1938,  1:  226,  n.) 

♦Dresden.  Sachsische  Landesbibliothek,  MS  Dc  156,  s.  XIII-XIV,  fols.  1-157. 
Thebaid  with,  excerpts  from  the  scholia  of  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See  Max  Ma- 
nitius,  Rheinisches  Museum  fiir  Philologie,  [1902]  57:  397-421.) 

♦Diisseldorf.  Landes-  und  Stadtbibliothek,  MS  F.  49,  s.  X-XI.  Fragments 
of  the  Thebaid  with  scholia  of  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See  Wilhelm  Schmitz, 


28  LACTANTIUS   PLASIDUS  ON   THE  THEBAID 

"Ein  Diisseldorfer  Statiusfragment,"  Rheinisches  Museum  fiir  Philologie,  21 
[1866]:  438-43;  and  Wilhelm  Crecelius,  "Ein  Diisseldorfer  Statiusfragment," 
Rheinisches  Musuem  fiir  Philologie,  32  [1877]:  632-36.) 

♦Edinburgh.  National  Library  of  Scotland,  MS  18,  5,  12,  s.  XII,  fols.  l-99\ 
The baid  with  excerpts  from  scholia  of  Lactantius  Placidus.  (Institut  de  Re- 
cherche et  d'Histoire  des  Textes.) 

*Escorial.  Real  Biblioteca,  MS  h.  II.  8,  an.  1459.  Commentary  only  of  Lac- 
tantius Placidus.  (See  G.  Antolin,  Catdlogo  des  los  codices  latinos  de  la  Real 
Biblioteca  del  Escorial,  [1911]  2:  314-15. 

Florence.  Biblioteca  Medicea  Laurentiana,  MS  plut.  38,  6,  s.  XI,  fols.  1-76''. 
This  is  Boccaccio's  manuscript  of  the  Thebaid  with  the  commentary  of  Lac- 
tantius Placidus.  (See  Carlo  Landi,  "Di  un  commento  medievale  indito  della 
Thebaide  di  Stazio,"  Atti  e  Memorie  deWAccademia  di  Scienze,  Lettre  ed  Arti  in 
Padova,  30  [1914]:  316,  n.;  and  A.  M.  Bandinius,  Catalogus  codicum  latinorum 
Bibliothecae  Mediceae  Laurentiannae,  2:  261.) 

Florence.  Biblioteca  Medicea  Laurentiana,  MS  Strozzi  130,  s.  XIII.  Fols. 
1-1 H""  contain  the  Thebaid  with  a  few  marginal  scholia  from  Lactantius 
Placidus.  Fols.  115-20"^  contain  the  Achilleid,  unglossed.  (See  Bandinius, 
Bibliotheca  Leopoldinae  sive  Supplementi,  10:  508-9;  and  Jacques  Boussard,  "Le 
Classement  des  manuscrits  de  la  Thebaide  de  Stace,"  Revue  des  Etudes  Lat- 
ines,  30  [1952]:  225.) 

Florence.  Biblioteca  Riccardiana,  MS  Rice.  651  (M.  IV.  xv),  s.  XV,  fols. 
1-118^.  Commentary  only.  (See  J.  Lamius,  Catalogus  codicum  manuscripto- 
rum  qui  in  Bibliotheca  Riccardiana  Florentina  adservantur,  1756,  p.  254.) 

*Kassel.  Landesbibliothek,  MS  lat.  164,  s.  XI.  Marginal  scholia  from  Lac- 
tantius Placidus  on  Thebaid  1.68S-2A09.  (See  P.  Kohlmann,  Philologus,  33 
[1874]:  129;  and  O.  MuUer,  Wochenschrift fiir  klassische  Philologie,  20  [1903]: 
192.) 

♦Leiden.  University  Library,  MS  Gron.  70  (374),  s.  XI,  fols.  1-214.  Thebaid 
with  marginal  scholia  containing  excerpts  from  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See 
Kohlmann,  ed.,  Thebaid,  p.  xi;  and  Alfred  Klotz,  ed.,  Thebais,  Leipzig,  1908, 
pp.  xxxvii-xxxviii.) 

♦Leipzig.  Universitatsbibliothek,  MS  Rep.  I,  12a,  (L.III),  s.  X.  Fragment 
of  the  Thebaid  (4: .352-7 53)  with  marginal  scholia  of  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See 
Klotz,  ed.,  Thebaid,  p.  xvii.) 

♦Leipzig.  Universitatsbibliothek,  MS  Rep.  I,  12,  (L.  II),  s.  XI.  Thebaid  with 
marginal  scholia  containing  excerpts  from  Lactantius  Placidus,  especially 
at  the  beginning  of  the  text.  (See  Klotz,  ed.,  Thebais,  pp.  xix-xxiii.) 

♦Liege.  Bibliotheque  de  I'Universite,  MS  660  (386  C),  x.  XI.  Fragment  of 
Thebaid  (10.  197-254)  with  marginal  scholia  of  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See 
Odette  Bouquiaux-Simon,  "Un  manuscrit  de  Stace  a  la  Bibliotheque  de 
I'Universite  de  Liege  (77z^'//ai-^^,  10.  197-254:),"  Latomus,  21  [1962]:  839-47.) 

London.  British  Museum,  MS  Arundel  389,  s.  XIII,  fols.   r-130.   Thebaid 


PAUL  M.    CLOGAN  29 

with  marginal  and  interlinear  glosses  containing  excerpts  from  Lactantius 
Placidus,  particularly  at  beginning  of  Book  1.  (See  Catalogue  of  Arundel  and 
Bumey  Manuscripts,  p.  115.) 

London.  British  Museum,  MS  Burney  258,  s.  XII-XIII,  fols.  4-111.  Thebaid 
with  margined  scholia  which  at  the  beginning  of  Book  1  contain  excerpts  from 
Lactantius  Placidus.  (See  J.  Forshall,  Catalogue  of  Manuscripts  in  the  British 
Museum,  New  Series,  London,  1834-1840,  pt.  2,  p.  67.) 

London.  British  Museum,  MS  Harley  2693,  s.  XV,  fols.  5-40''.  Excerpts 
from  Lactantius  Placidus  on  Thebaid  1-8.  (See  Catalogue  of  the  Harleian  Col- 
lection of  Manuscripts,  2:  708.) 

♦Montpellier.  Faculte  de  Medecine,  MS  H.  62,  s.  X,  fol.  ?>W\  Fragment 
of  the  Thebaid  (11.  409-587)  with  scholia  of  Lactantius  Placidus.  (Institut 
de  Recherche  et  d'Histoire  des  Textes.) 

Munich.  Bayerische  Staatsbibliothek,  MS  Monacensis  Clm  6396,  s.  XI,  fols. 
1-136^.  Thebaid  with  marginal  scholia  of  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See  E. 
Wolfflin,  Philologus,  24  [1865]:  156-58;  and  Halm,  Thomas,  Meyer,  Cat- 
alogus  Codicum  Latinorum  Bibliothecae  Regiae  Monacensis,  111,3.164.) 

Munich.  Bayerische  Staatsbibliothek,  MS  Monacensis  Clm.  14420,  s.  XIII, 
fols.  73-78.  Excerpts  from  the  commentary.  (See  Catalogus,  IV, 2. 170). 

Munich.  Bayerische  Staatsbibliothek,  MS  Monacensis  Clm.  17206,  s.  XII, 
fols.  1-29"^.  Thebaid  (beginning  at  6.  809)  with  marginal  scholia  of  Lactan- 
tius Placidus.  (See  Catalogus,  IV,  3.86.) 

Munich.  Bayerische  Staatsbibliothek,  MS  Monacensis  Clm.  19482,  s.  XI-XII, 
fols.  1-139  contain  the  commentary  of  Lactantius  Placidus.  Fols.  139-44 
contain  th^  Achilleid  With,  commentary  ascribed  to  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See 
E.  Wolfflin,  Philologus,  24  [1865]:  156;  R.  Jahnke,  ed.,  Lactantii  Placidi,  p. 
vii-x;  and  Bidez  and  Cumont,  Les  Mages  Hellenises,  1:  226.) 

Naples.  Biblioteca  Oratoriana  dei  Girolamini,  MS  C.  F.  2,  14  (CVI;  Pil.  X, 
XXXIII),  an.  1478,  fols.  1-150.  Commentary  only  with  a  few  marginal 
glosses.  Fols.  156-62  contain  the  commentary  ascribed  to  Lactantius  Pla- 
cidus on  the  Achilleid.  (See  E.  Madarini,  I  codici  manoscritti  della  Biblioteca  Or- 
atoriana di  Napoli,  [1897],  p.  197-98.) 

Oxford.  Bodleian  Library,  MS  Canon.  Class,  lat.  75  (18656),  s.  XV,  fols. 
2-99''.  Commentary  only  with  a  few  marginal  glosses.  Fol.  1-  I''  contains 
"Notitia  de  poeta  praemissa,"  (See  H.  O.  Coxe,  Catalogi  codicum  manuscrip- 
torum  Bibliothecae  Bodleianae,  Pars  tertia  [1854],  p.  143;  and  F.  Madan,  H. 
C raster,  A  Summary  Catalogue  of  Western  Manuscripts  in  the  Bodleian  Library,  4 
[1897]:  319.) 

Paris.  Bibliotheque  Nationale.  MS  lat.  8055  (Colbertinus),  s.  XI,  fols.  1-140. 
Thebaid  with  a  few  marginal  scholia  from  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See  Kohl- 
mann,  ed.,  Thebais,  p.  xiii.) 

Paris.  Bibliotheque  Nationale,  MS  lat.  8063,  s.  XIV,  fols.  l-9r.  Commen- 
tary only.  (See  Kohlmann,  Philologus,  33,  [1874]:  128-38;  Jahnke,  ed.,  Lac- 


30 


LACTANTIUS   PLASIDUS  ON  THE  THEBAID 


tantii  Placidi,  P.  vii-viii;  and  Bidez  and  Cumont,  Les Mages  Hellenises ,  1:  226, 
n.) 

Paris.  Bibliotheque  Nationale,  MS  lat.  8064,  s.  XV,  fols.  1-136.  Commen- 
tary only.  (See  Kohlmann  ibid.;  Bidez  and  Cumont,  ibid;  Jahnke,  p. 
vii-viii.) 

Paris.  Bibliotheque  Nationale,  MS  lat.  10317,  s.  X,  fols.  1-164".  ThebaidWiXh 
excerpts  from  scholia  of  Lactantius  Placidus.  Fols.  164''-82  contain  the 
Achilleid with  very  few  interlinear  glosses.  (See  Kohlmann,  ibid.;  Franz  Cu- 
mont, Textes  et  Monuments  figures  relatifs  aux  My steres  de  Mithra,  Brussels,  [1896] 
2:  46;  and  Jahnke,  ibid.,  p.  viii.) 

Paris.  Bibliotheque  Nationale,  MS  lat.  13046,  s.  X-XI,  fols.  1-117\  Thebaid 
with  marginal  scholia  containing  excerpts  from  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See 
Kohlmann,  ed.,  Thebais,  p.  ix;  and  Klotz,  ed.,  Thebais,  p.  xii.) 

*Pavia.  private  library,  s.  X-XI.  Fragment  of  the  Thebaid  (11.307-500)  with 
marginal  scholia  of  Lactantius  Placidus,  discovered  in  the  binding  of  a  book. 
(See  G.  Bezzola,  "Un  Fragmento  di  Codice  della  Thebaide  di  Stazio,"  Ath- 
enaeum [Pavia],  18  [  1940] :5 1-53.) 

Perugia.  Biblioteca  Comunale  (Augusta),  MS  C.  53  (170),  an.  1399.  fols.  1-59. 
Commentary  only,  with  a  medieval  accessus  ("Queritur  quo  tempore")  at 
the  beginning  of  the  scholia.  This  is  Franciscus  Maturantius'  manuscript 
of  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See  G.  Mazzatinti,  Inventari  dei  Manoscritti  delle  Bib- 
lioteche  dltalia,  5  [1895]: 94.) 

Perugia.  Biblioteca  Comunale  (Augusta),  MS  G.  1  (412),  s.  XV,  fols.  1-169. 
Commentary  only  with  "Queritur  quo  tempore"  at  the  beginning.  This  is 
also  Franciscus  Maturantius'  manuscript  of  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See  Maz- 
zatinti, Inventari,  5:127) 

Pistoia.  Biblioteca  Forteguerriana,  MS  39  (A.  45),  s.  XIV,  fols.  1-73.  Scholia 
of  Lactantius  Placidus.  (Institut  de  Recherche  et  d'Historie  des  Textes.) 

Roma.  Biblioteca  Vallicelliana,  MS  C.  60,  s.  XV,  fols.  V-9b\  Commentary 
only,  with  "vita  Statii"  on  fol.  1".  (See  Inventarium  orhnium  codicum  Manuscrip- 
torum  Graecorum  et  Latinorum  Bibliothecae  Vallicellianae ,  1749,  I,  1228''-29.) 

Valenciennes.  Bibliotheque  Municipale,  MS  394  (Valentinianus),  s.  IX-X, 
fols.  91-124"'.  Lactantius  Placidus'  commentary  is  incomplete,  beginning 
in  the  course  of  the  commentary  on  Book  2.281.  The  text  stops  in  the  mid- 
dle of  a  page  at  12:676.  There  are  other  lacuna  in  the  lower  margin  in  a 
hand  contemporary  with  the  manuscript.  It  contains  numerous  variants  of 
the  text  as  found  in  Jahnke's  edition.  (See  G.  Funaioli,  Studi  Italiana  di  Fil- 
ologia  Classica  21  [1915]:  1-73 ;  and  Paul  van  de  Woestijne,  Revue  Beige  de  Phi- 
lologie,  19  [1940]:37-63. 

Vatican.  Biblioteca  Apostolica  Vaticana,  MS  Barb.  lat.  84,  s.  XV,  fols. 
1-119''.  Commentary  of  Lactantius  Placidus,  with  a  "vita  Statii"  on  fol.  1. 
(See  Bidez  and  Cumont,  Les  Mages  Hellenises,  1:226-27.) 

Vatican.  Biblioteca  Apostolica  Vaticana,  MS  Pal.  lat.  1694,  s.  X,  fols.  1-70. 


PAUL  M.   CLOGAN  3I 

Commentary  only  with  marginal  notes,  and  "vita  Statii"  on  fol.  1 .  (See  Bidez 
and  Cumont,  ibid.) 

Vatican.  Biblioteca  Apostolica  Vaticana,  MS  Urb.  lat  361,  s.  XV,  fols.  1-133. 
Commentary  only,  with  "vita  Statii"  at  the  beginning.  Fols.  133-38''  con- 
tain the  commentary  on  Achilleid  ascribed  to  Lactantius  Placidus.  (See  C. 
Stornaiolo,  Codices  Urbinates  Latini,  1  [1902]: 332.) 

Vatican.  Biblioteca  Apostolica  Vaticana,  MS  Vat.  lat.  3381,  s.  XV,  fols.  1-162. 
Thebaid  with  the  commentary  of  Lactantius  Placidus  and  "vita  Statii"  at  the 
beginning.  (Institut  de  Recherche  et  d'Histoire  des  Textes.) 

*Vienna.  Osterreichische  Nationalbibliothek,  Bibl.  nat.  MS  3118,  s.  XV,  fols. 
1-51.  Commentary  of  Lactantius  Placidus.  (Institut  de  Recherche  et  d'His- 
torie  des  Textes.) 

Wolfenbiittel.  Herzog-August-Bibliothek,  MS  Guelf.  lat.  54,  2°  (Guidianus), 
s.  XI,  fols.  1-140''.  Thebaid  With  marginal  scholia  from  Lactantius  Placidus. 
Fols.  145-63^  contain  the  Achilleid,  unglossed.  (See  Otto  von  Heinemann, 
Die  Handschriften  der  Herzoglichen  Bibliothek,  vol.  4,  Abth. ,  Die  Guidischen  Hands- 
chriften,  1913,  p.  114;  Kohlmann,  ed.,  Thebais,  pp.  ix-x;  and  Klotz,  ed., 
Thebais,  pp.  xxvi-xxxviii.) 


Notes 


1.  Paul  van  de  Woestijne,  "Les  Scholies  a  la  Thebaide  de  Stace:  Remarques  et  sug- 
gestions," L'Antiquite  Classique,  N.S.  19  (1950):  pp.  149-63.  For  studies  on  Lactantius 
Placidus  and  his  works,  see  Johann  Breese,  De  Scholiis  Statianis,  quae  Lactantii  Placidi  no- 
mine feruntur,  quaestiones  selectae  (diss.  Griefswald,  1919);  Alfred  Klotz,  "Die  Statiusscho- 
\ien,''  Archivfiir  Lat.  Lexicog.  u.  Gram.,  15  (1908):485-525;  Richard  Klotz,  De  Scholiis 
Statianis  Commentatio  I  (Treptow,  1895);  Carlo  Landi,  "II  Carme  'De  Ave  Phoenice'  e 
il  suo  dintOTG,''  AttieMem.  della  R.  Accad.  .  .  .  in  Padova,  N.S.  XXXI  (1915),  33-72,  esp. 
64-70;  Hugo  Magnus,  ed.,  Lactanti  Placidi  qui  dicitur  Narrationes  Fabularum  Ovidianarum 
in  P.  Ovidi  Nasonis  Metamorphoseon  Lj^n'A'F  (Berlin,  1914),  pp.  627-721;  Maresa  Ma- 
sante,  "Lattanzio  Firmiano  o  Lattanzio  Placido  autore  del  DeAve  Phoenice?"  Didaskaleion, 
3  (1925):  105-10;  Arminius  Schottky,  De  Pretio  Lactantiani  Commentarii  in  Statii  Thebaida, 
et  de  Nomine,  Philosophia  et  Aetate  Commentatoris  (diss.  Breslau,  1846);  Paul  van  de  Woes- 
tijne, "Le  Codex  Valentinianus  394  de  Lactantius  Placidus,"  Revue  Beige  de  Philol.  et  d'Hist. , 
19  (1940):  3 7-63.  For  other  studies  dealing  with  Lactantius  Placidus  or  the  scholia  see 
Joseph  Bidez  and  Franz  Cumont,  Les  Mages  Hellenises  (Paris,  1938),  1 :225-35;  Theodor 
Birt,  "Zu  Senecas  Tragodien,"  Rheinisches Mus.Jixr.  Philol. ,  34  (1879):557;  Wilhelm  Drex- 
ler,  ""Miscellanea,"  Neuejahrbiicherfiir  Philol.  u.  Paedagogik,  145  (1892),  843-44;  J.  Fran- 
cois, Les  scolies  de  Stace  (these  de  licence,  Univ.  de  Liege,  1936);  listed  in  Rev.  Beige 
de  Philol.  et  d'Hist. ,  15  (1936):295;  Gino  Funaioli,  Esegesi  Virgiliana  Antica  (Milan,  1930), 
pp.  444-508;  Rudolf  Helm,  review  ofjahnke's  ed.  of  Lactantius  Placidus,  Berliner  Phi- 
lol. Wochenschrift,  19  (1899):425-28;  Varjas  Istvan,  "Kritikai  Adalekok  a  Statius  The- 
baisdhoz  irt  scholionokhoz,"  Egytemes  Philologiai  Kozlony,  17  (1893):  651-63,  727-45 
(critical  notes  on  the  scholia);  Philip  Kohlmann,  "Die  Inschrift  des  Othryades  beim  Sta- 


32  LACTANTIUS  PLASIDUS  ON  THE  THEBAID 


tinsscholisisten, "  Rheinisches  Mus.  fiir  Philol. ,  31  (1876):302-4.  G.  Thilo  and  Hermann 
Hagen,  eds.,  Servii  Grammatici  qui  feruntur  in  Vergilii  Carmina  Commentarii,  1 
(1881):xxxv-xxxvi;  Luigi  Valmaggi,  "La  Fortuna  di  Stazio  nella  Tradizione  Letteraria 
LatinaeBassolatina,"/?^mtorf/Fi7o/.  e  D'Istruzione  Class. ,  21  (1893): 489-95;  Paul  Wess- 
ner,  reviews  in  "Rxivsidin's  Jahresb. ,  113  (1902):213-14;  139  (1908):  186-89;  and  188 
(1921):228-34;  Ulrich  von  Wilamowitz-Moellendorff,  "Lesefriichte,"  Hermes,  34 
(1899):601-6. 

2.  "Zu  den  Statiusscholien,"  Philologus,  24  (1866):  156-58  (especially  helpful  for  the 
Greek  quotations  in  Lactantius  Placidus). 

3.  Neue  Scholien  zur  Thebais  des  Statins,  aus  einer  Pariser  Handschrift  herausgegeben  (Posen, 
1873);  and  Kohlmann,  "Beitrage  zur  Kritik  des  Statiusscholiasten,"  Philologus,  33 
(1874):128-38. 

4.  Lactantii  Placidi  Qui  Dictivr  Commentarios  in  Statii  Thebaida  et  Commentarium  in  Achil- 
leida  (Leipzig,  1898). 

5.  See,  especially,  Rudolf  Helm,  Berliner  Philologische  Wochenschrift,  19  (1890):425-28. 

6.  "Aus  Dresdener  Handschriften:  H:  Scholien  zu  Statins'  Thebais,"  Rheinisches  Mu- 
seum fUr  Philologie,  57  (1902):397-421;  see  also  Max  Manitius,  Geschichte  der  Lateinischen 
Literatur  des  Mittelalters ,  1:635  and  2:658. 

7.  "Die  Statiushandschriften,"  Archiv  fiir  lateinische  Lexicographie  und  Grammatik,  15 
(1908):485-525. 

8.  "Da  un  codice  di  Valenciennes,"  Studi  Italiani  di  Fiologia  Classica,  21  (1915):  1-73. 

9.  "Le  Codex  Valentinianus  394  de  Lactantius  Placidus,"  Revue  Beige  de  Philologie  et 
d'Histoire,  19  (1940): 3 7-63.  See  also  van  de  Woestijne,  "Les  scolies  a  la  "Thebaide" 
de  Stace:  Remarques  et  suggestions,"  L'Antiquite  Classique,  N.S.  19  (1950):  149-63. 

10.  I  revise  and  supplement  Paul  van  Woestijne's  tentative  list  in  Revue  Beige  de  Phi- 
lologie et  d'Histoire,  19  (1940): 38,  n.  2. 

11.  For  these,  see  Paul  M.  Clogan,  "Medieval  Glossed  Manuscripts  of  the  Thebaid," 
Manuscripta,  11  (1967):  102-12. 


"Quo  me  Phoebe  rapis  ..." 

Uberlegungen  zum  Dichterselbstverstandnis 

im  italienischen  Spathumanismus 

Stephan  Fiissel 

Literatur  und  Kultur  der  Epoche  Maximilians  I.  (1493-1519)  standen 
in  jiingster  Zeit  verstarkt  im  Blickpunkt  wissenschaftlichen  Inter- 
esses.  Der  Abschlufi  der  monumentalen  fiinfbandigen  "Biographic" 
des  Kaisers  von  Hermann  Wiesflecker  und  die  gewichtige  Habilitationsschrift 
von  Jan-Dirk  Miiller,  Gedechtnus,  kennzeichnen  die  Breite  und  Intensitat  dieser 
Arbeiten.^  Ihre  Ergebnisse  werfen  Fragen  zum  Spannungsverhaltnis  zwischen 
Dichter  und  Herrscher  im  Bereich  panegyrischer  Literatur  auf,  denen  im  fol- 
genden  nachgegangen  werden  soil. 

Der  Historiker  Wiesflecker  lafit  an  seiner  Geringschatzung  literarischer 
Formen  und  artifizieller  Gestaltung  keinen  Zweifel:  ein  Epos  iiber  den  Baye- 
rischen  Erbfolgekrieg  bewertet  er  als  "dichterische  Entstellung  der  Ereignisse 
mit  einzelnen  brauchbaren  Tatsachen,"^  Maximilians  Theuerdank  nennt  er  eine 
"krause  Mischung  aus  Dichtung  und  Wahrheit,"^  den  "beamtete  Reim- 
schmiede"  nach  Entwiirfen  des  Kaisers  "in  eine  dichterische  Form  zu  brin- 
gen"  hatten/  Zusammenfassend  bezeichnet  er  die  lateinisch  und  deutsch 
schreibenden  Dichter  am  Kaiserhof  rein  funktional  als  "Kern  jenes  literarisch- 
publizistischen  Dienstes,  der  dem  Kaiser  seine  hervorragende  Tresse'  be- 
sorgte."^ 

Der  Literaturwissenschaftler  Miiller  sieht  die  Rolle  der  intemationalen  Hof- 
humanisten  differenzierter.  Da  ihn  aber  seine  Themenstellung  an  literarische 
Texte  eines  bestimmten  Verwendungszusammenhanges  band,^  spricht  auch 
er  von  einer  "rigiden  Zweckbindung  literarischer  Gattungsmuster"^  und  von 
einer  "rigiden  Instrumentalisierung  im  Dienste  herrscherlicher  laudes.^  In 
summierenden  Darstellungen  kommt  es  dann  zur  Ubertragung  dieser  spe- 
ziellen  Ergebnisse  auf  die  gesamte  Literatur  der  Epoche.  Mit  Bezug  auf  Miiller 
schreibt  etwa  Friedrich  Ohly  1984  in  seinen  "Bemerkungen  eines  Philologen 
zur  Memoria,"  dafi  unter  Maximilian  "das  einst  bunte  Formenfeld  der  Gat- 
tungen  mit  imperialer  Gebarde  in  den  einebnenden  Dienst  des  Anbaus  einer 
minder  farbigen  Hof-Memoria"  genommen  sei.^ 


34  QUO   ME  PHOEBE   RAPIS 

Da  diese  verkiirzende  Sichtweise  die  Gefahr  in  sich  birgt,  daft  — pointiert 
gesagt  — eine  ganze  Humanistengeneration  zum  Biittel  herrscherlicher  Inter- 
essen  degradiert  wird,  mochte  ich  in  der  gebotenen  Kiirze  am  Beispiel  eines 
bedeutenden  italienischen  Panegyrikers^^  Maximilians,  Riccardo  Bartolini  aus 
Perugia,  das  Autorselbstverstandnis  in  das  Zentrum  der  Interpretation  riick- 
en. 

Bartolini  (1475-1529)  gehorte  von  1504  bis  1507  in  Begleitung  seines  On- 
kels,  des  Nuntius  Mariano  Bartolini,  und  von  1514  bis  1519  als  Kaplan  von 
Kardinal  Matthaus  Lang  zum  engeren  Humanistenzirkel  des  Kaisers."  Aus 
Anlafi  des  Bayerischen  Erbfolgekrieges  verfafite  er  ein  Epos  Austrias,  das  zur 
Verherrlichung  des  Hauses  Habsburg  angelegt  war  und  mit  der  von  Conrad 
Celtis  geplanten  Maximilianeis  vergleichbar  ist;^^  Bartolini  schuf  damit  das  ein- 
zige  Renaissanceepos  fur  einen  bedeutenden  Herrscher  nordlich  der  Alpen. 
Die  diplomatischen  Vorverhandlungen  und  den  Prunk  der  Wiener  Doppel- 
hochzeit  von  1515  beschrieb  er  in  einem  Hodoeporicon,  dessen  kulturhistorische 
Exkurse  und  Stadtebeschreibungen  bedeutend  sind  und  das  interessante  Ein- 
blicke  in  die  Lebensweise  und  das  Schaffen  der  Hofpoeten  ermoglicht.  In  die 
spanische  Nachfolgefrage  1516  schaltete  er  sich  mit  einem  publizistisch  hochst 
wirkungsvollen  Heroischen  Brief  ein,  iiber  den  Augsburger  Reichstag  von  1518 
berichtete  er  nach  seiner  Dichterkronung  in  offizieller  Funktion.  An  der  Seite 
von  Kardinal  Lang  verfolgte  er  den  Wahlkampf  1519  und  feierte  den  Sieg  Karls 
mit  drei  panegyrischen  Flugschriften.  Grundlage  fiir  dieses  umfangreiche  li- 
terarische  Werk  bildet  seine  Professur  in  arte  oratoria  in  der  Nachfolge  Fran- 
cesco Maturanzios  in  Perugia;  von  dieser  Tatigkeit  geben  Vergil-, 
Apuleius-und  Liviuskommentare  sowie  eine  Ubersetzung  der  Theogonie  He- 
siods  ein  beredtes  Zeugnis. 

Bartolini  kann  als  Muster  eines  poeta  eruditus  der  Renaissance  angesehen 
werden.  Er  bezog  sein  Wissen  und  seine  Weisheit  aus  den  Schriften  der  An- 
tike,  die  er  mit  umfangreichen  praefationes  zu  interpretieren  suchte  wobei  er 
gleichzeitig  bemiiht  war,  sie  mit  eigenen  Werken  wetteifernd  zu  iibertreffen. 
Dichten  bedeutete  ihm  kiinstlerische  Auseinandersetzung  mit  den  durch  die 
Tradition  vorgegebenen  Inhalten  und  Formen.  Die  von  Cicero  erhobenen  For- 
derungen  fiir  den  doctus  orator  iibertrug  er  auf  den  Dichter;  dieser  soil  iiber 
umfassendes  Wissen  verfiigen  und  dem  Ideal  des  Weisen  entsprechen,  da  die 
gewonnene  "sapientia"  nach  Meinung  Ciceros  {Tusculanae  disputationes  4,26,57) 
und  Augustinus'  {De  trinitate  XIV,  1,3)  "rerum  divinarum  et  humanarum  sci- 
entia"  bedeutet.^^  Wie  in  Homer  und  Vergil  das  Wissen  ihrer  Zeit  seinen  Nie- 
derschlag  gefunden  hat,  mufi  der  Dichter  der  Renaissance  iiber  das  gesamte 
Spektrum  der  geistigen,  naturwissenschaftlichen  und  praktischen  Kenntnisse 
verfiigen,  nichts  darf  ihm  fremd  sein.^'^  Der  poeta  doctus  wurde  zum  Leitbild 
des  Dichters  iiberhaupt. 

Bartolini  nahm  sich  Vergil  zum  Vorbild  fiir  seine  Arbeit,  wie  er  in  einem 
jiingst  ermittelten  handschriftlichen  Kommentar  detailliert  nachweist.'^  Er 


STEPHAN   FUSSEL  35 

beschreibt  darin  die  vorbildliche  Arbeitsweise  Vergils,  der  sich  an  Theokrit 
bei  der  Abfassung  seiner  Bukolik  und  an  Homer  bei  seinem  Epos  angelehnt 
habe.  Bartolinis  Kommentar  ist  zugleich  eines  der  friihesten  bekanntgewor- 
denen  Zeugnisse  iiber  das  Wissen  von  der  Homer-imitatio  Vergils.  ^^  Barto- 
linis erudite  Kenntnisse  der  griechischen  Literatur  zeigen  sich  nicht  nur  in 
seinen  Kommentaren,  sondern  auch  an  zentralen  Stellen  seiner  Dichtung:  so 
greift  er  bei  einer  Horaz- Adaptation  unmittelbar  auf  Pindar  zuriick  und  ver- 
wendet  auch  in  seinem  Epos  mehrfach  Reminiszenzen  an  die  homerische  Dich- 
tung. Mit  Theokrit,  Homer,  Horaz,  Ovid  und  Vergil  weifi  er  sich  einig,  dafi 
es  nur  dem  Dichter  vorbehalten  bleibt,  den  Menschen  "aeternum  nomen"  zu 
erhalten.  In  einem  carmen  an  den  Kaiserlichen  Rat  Blasius  Holzl^  im  Jahre 
1518  (eine  Adaptation  der  Horaz-Ode  1,1  an  Maecenas)  grenzt  er  seine  Stel- 
lung  als  Dichter  gegen  andere  "Berufe"  ab;  er  zeigt  das  Streben  nach  Aner- 
kennung  und  ewigem  Ruhm  beim  Soldaten,  der  den  Tod  um  des  hoheren 
Zieles  willen  verachtet,  beim  Olympioniken,  der  morderische  Strapazen  auf 
sich  nimmt,  um  die  Siegespalme  zu  erringen.  Die  Beispielreihe  schliefit  mit 
dem  Dichter,  der  mit  dem  Lorbeerkranz  geschmuckt  wird.  Die  Anerkennung 
durch  die  Musen  hebt  ihn  iiber  die  Masse  der  Menschen  (Vs.  32:  "vulgus"^^) 
empor;  seine  besondere  Stellung  verdeutlicht  er  zudem  durch  die  Bezeichnung 
"vates";  der  "Seherdichter"  nahm  eine  herausgehobene  Position  als  Mittler  zwi- 
schen  den  Gottern  und  Menschen  ein.  Indem  Bartolini  in  dieser  Ode  Holzl 
bittet,  ihn  unter  die  Lyriker  einzureihen,  wie  auch  Horaz  den  Maecenas  bat, 
stellt  er  sich  selbstbewufit  in  eine  Reihe  mit  den  neun  griechischen  und  dem 
einen  entscheidenden  romischen  Lyriker,  Horaz. 

Die  Moglichkeit,  mit  seinen  Versen  ewigen  Ruhm  zu  bereiten,  betont  Bar- 
tolini auch  in  einem  panegyrischen  carmen  fur  Kaiser  Karl  V.  nach  der  Wahl 
im  Jahre  1519.^^  Er  unterstellt  ihm,  neben  dem  Eichenlaub  des  Kriegers  auch 
den  Lorbeer  der  Dichter  zu  erstreben,  und  folgert  daraus  selbstbewufit,  Karl 
miisse  die  "vates"  auszeichnen,  denen  es  allein  gegeben  sei,  mit  ihrer  Dich- 
tung den  Taten  der  Fiirsten  ewiges  Leben  zu  verleihen.^^  Mit  dem  gleichen 
topischen  Wortgebrauch  hatte  sich  Bartolini  bereits  vier  Jahre  zuvor  in  einem 
Epigramm  an  Konrad  Peutinger  bei  der  Herausgabe  der  Werke  des  Jordanes 
geaufiert.^^  Er  stellt  dort  die  bekannte  rhetorische  Frage,  wer  denn  von  den 
Taten  Alexanders  des  Grofien  oder  des  Inderkonigs  Porus  oder  von  der  grim- 
migen  Macht  der  Perser  noch  wissen  wiirde,  wenn  sie  nicht  durch  griechische 
und  romische  Schriftsteller  iiberliefert  waren.  Vergleichbare  Formulierun- 
gen  nimmt  Bartolini  in  der  Einleitung  seines  Reiseberichtes  wieder  auf  und 
fragt,  wie  denn  sonst  die  "industria,"  "prudentia"  und  "sapientia"  seines  Herrn, 
Kardinal  Matthaus  Lang,  bekannt  werden  konne,  wenn  nicht  durch  eben  diese 
Schrift.  Aus  seinem  Livius-Kommentar  ersehen  wir,  dafi  bei  ihm  der  Ge- 
danke  Ciceros  {De  oratore  2,9,  36),  "historia"  sei  auch  "magistra  vitae,"  zugun- 
sten  der  "vitae  memoria"  in  den  Hintergrund  tritt.^^ 

In  dem  erwahnten  Epigramm  an  Peutinger  geht  Bartolini  noch  einen  Schritt 


36  QUO   ME  PHOEBE  RAPIS 

weiter  und  betont  die  wertvolle  Arbeit  der  Editoren,  die  zum  zweitenmal  die 
Texte  der  Vergangenheit  entreifien: 

Ergo  tua  quoniam  cura  Conrade,  Gothorum 

lornandes  scripsit  qui  fera  bella  Ducum 
Redditur  ad  vitam  rursus,  tibi  gratia  triplex 

Debetur,  qui  non  scripta  perire  sinis.^'^ 

Die  wichtige  Aufgabe  der  Editoren  betonte  auch  sein  Freund  Jakob  Spiegel 
in  einer  Sammlung  von  Epicedia  zum  Tode  Maximilians  im  Jahre  1519;  er  hebt 
dort  hervor,  dafi  die  "Aetas  Maximiliana"  nicht  nur  fiir  die  Dichter,  sondern 
auch  fiir  die  Editoren  giinstige  Arbeitsbedingungen  geboten  habe  und  erwahnt 
in  diesem  Zusammenhang  u.a.  Erasmus,  Reuchlin,  Pirckheimer,  Budaeus, 
Cospus  und  Vadian.^^  Die  Edition  "literarischer  Schatze,"  der  vorbildlichen 
Texte  der  Alten,  wird  dem  originaren  dichterischen  Schaffen  ebenbiirtig  zur 
Seite  gestellt. 

Zum  Dichten  ist  nach  Meinung  Bartolinis  und  seiner  Zeitgenossen  sowohl 
eine  innere  Disposition  (entsprechend  einer  Begnadung  durch  die  Musen)  als 
auch  die  Schulung  an  den  vorbildlichen  Texten  der  Antike  und  das  Bestreben, 
moglichst  das  gesamte  Wissen  der  Zeit  prasent  zu  halten,  notwendig.  Bar- 
tolinis Umgang  mit  der  antiken  Literatur  wird  an  zwei  Beispielen  besonders 
deutlich:  im  Jahre  1517  hielt  sich  Bartolini  mit  Caspar  Ursinus  Velius,  Sta- 
bius,  Sperantius  und  anderen  in  der  Salzburgischen  Enklave  Miihldorf  am 
Inn  auf,  die  Kardinal  Lang  als  Koadjutor  des  Bistums  1514  zugesprochen  be- 
kommen  hatte  und  in  der  er  mit  einer  kleinen  Hofhaltung  residierte.  Bartolini 
litt  dort  sehr  unter  Vereinsamung  und  versuchte,  durch  einen  regen  Brief- 
wechsel  den  Kontakt  mit  seinen  auswartigen  Freunden  aufrechtzuerhalten; 
bei  Vadian  beklagte  er  sich  mehrfach  iiber  die  unertragliche  Langeweile.^^ 
Sie  vertrieben  sich  die  Zeit  durch  Auffiihrungen  z.B.  des  Eunuchus  von  Te- 
renz  in  einer  sonst  unbekannten  deutschen  Ubertragung  von  Sebastian  Spe- 
rantius.^^ Zusammen  mit  Ursinus  versuchte  Bartolini  dort  eine  Komodie  mit 
dem  Arbeitstitel  Zelotypus  zu  schreiben.  Sie  gaben  dieses  Vorhaben  jedoch  bald 
auf,  da  sie  (wie  Velius  Vadian  schreibt^^)  an  diesem  Ort  iiber  keine  Biicher 
und  Anregungen  verfiigten,  deshalb  kamen  sie  nicht  voran.  Zum  Dichten 
benotigen  sie  also  die  Vorlage,  in  diesem  Falle  wohl  Terenz-  oder  Plautus- 
Texte,  an  denen  sie  sich  schulen  und  mit  denen  sie  sich  messen  konnen. 

Bartolini  folgt  der  Arbeitsweise  Vergils:  er  stellt  fest,  dafi  dieser  die  grie- 
chischen  Vorbilder  kannte,  sie  nachzuahmen  und  zu  iibertreffen  suchte.  In 
seiner  Nachfolge  geht  auch  er  iiber  die  romischen  Vorbilder  direkt  auf  die 
griechischen  Vorlagen  zuriick.  Um  ein  kurzes  Beispiel  aus  d^TAustrias  zu  geben: 
den  Kampf  zwischen  Venus  und  Diana  im  vierten  Buch  gestaltet  Bartolini  (4, 
791  ff.)  dem  Kampf  von  Diomedes  mit  Aphrodite  in  der  Ilias  (5,  320-70)  ge- 
treu  nach;  auch  Venus  entstromt  kein  Blut  aus  der  Wunde,  sondern  gottlicher 
"Nektar"  so  wie  bei  Aphrodite  ixwp  {Ilias  5,  340);  ein  Kampf  von  Maximilian 


STEPHAN  FUSSEL  37 

gegen  Pallas  Athene  selbst,  die  schliefilich  von  Merkur  in  den  Himmel  geret- 
tet  wird,  wird  parallel  zum  funften  Buch  der  Ilias  gezeichnet.^^ 

Bis  in  die  Details  der  Schreibweise  von  latinisierten  oder  grazisierten  Orts- 
namen  geht  Bartolini  mit  philologischer  Akribie  vor.  In  einem  Brief  an  seinen 
Drucker,  Matthias  Schiirer  in  Strafiburg,  erklart  er  die  unterschiedliche 
Schreibweise  der  Ortsnamen,  die  er  so  auch  unterschiedlich  bei  seinen  Vor- 
bildern  vorfinde.  Er  geht  noch  einen  Schritt  weiter  und  iiberpriift  lateinisch- 
griechische  Entsprechungen  am  Beispiel  von  Aenaria,  dem  heutigen  Ischia, 
das  bei  Vergil  {Aeneis  9,  716)  als  "Inarime"  erscheint;  er  folgt  Maro,  "...  qui 
Inarimen  dixit,  cum  apud  Homerum  [//.  2,  783]  eiv  aptfXOK;  et  Hesiodum 
[Theogonie  Vs.  304]  eiv  dpipLoiaiv  cum  praepositione  legatur."^^ 

In  dem  genannten  Brief  an  den  Drucker  Schiirer  aufiert  sich  Bartolini  auch 
grundsatzlich  iiber  seinen  Arbeitsstil;  diese  Passagen  ubernimmt  Vadian 
wortlich  in  seinen  Widmungsbrief  an  Kardinal  Lang.  Der  Widmungsbrief 
wurde  bisher  von  der  Vadian-Forschung  als  wichtigste  Zusammenfassung  der 
Poetik  Vadians  angesehen,  so  etwa  von  Heinz  Haffter  in  seiner  1983  erschie- 
nenen  Ausgabe  der  Dedikationsepisteln  von  und  an  Vadian^  ^  oder  auch  von 
Peter  Schaffer,  dem  Editor  von  Vadians  Poetik. ^^  Da  Bartolinis  Brief  an 
Schiirer  aber  die  einzige  Quelle  fiir  Vadian  darstellte,  die  er  getreu  nachzeich- 
nete,  gebiihrt  das  Lob  iiber  die  Wissenschaftlichkeit  des  Widmungsbriefes 
ausschliefilich  ihm  selbst;  diese  Ubernahme  erklart  auch  die  Ubereinstim- 
mung  in  der  poetologischen  Grundauffassung  von  Vadian  und  Bartolini,  die 
sich  noch  an  weiteren  Punkten  nachweisen  lafit.  Den  verlorengegangenen  Brief 
Bartolinis  konnte  ich  im  Nachlafi  von  Melchior  Goldast  in  der  Universitats- 
bibliothek  Bremen  wiederfmden.^^  Vadian  bescheinigt  Bartolini  ferner,  dafi 
es  ihm  gelungen  sei,  in  der  Nachfolge  Homers  und  Vergils  in  einem  Epos  ein 
gelehrtes  Kompendium  des  Wissens  seiner  Zeit  zu  schaffen.  "Es  sind  hier  einige 
Angaben  aus  physikalischer  und  astronomischer  Literatur  und  geographische 
Beschreibungen  der  lieblichsten  Gegenden  Deutschlands  eingeflochten."  '^  Die 
enzyklopadisch  ausgerichtete  Gelehrsamkeit  Bartolinis,  die  weit  iiber  das  en- 
gere  Spektrum  der  studia  humanitatis  hinausgeht,  wird  auch  in  seinem  Brief- 
wechsel  mit  seinem  Peruginer  KoUegen  Francesco  Camoeno^^  vom  Jahre  1523 
deutlich,  der  in  der  Erlauterung  einiger  Schriften  angibt,  dafi  sie  sich  neben 
der  Kenntnis  der  Grammatik  und  Rhetorik  um  enzyklopadisches  Wissen 
bemiihten,  das  die  Weisheiten  der  Philosophic,  der  Astrologie,  aber  auch  der 
Agrikultur,  der  Architektur  und  der  Medizin  einschliefie.  Jakob  Spiegels  Kom- 
mentar  zur  Austrias^^  zeigt  an  vielen  Stellen  Nachweise  gelungener  imitatio  der 
antiken  autores  und  verweist  neben  den  Vorbildern  Vergil,  Homer,  Ovid,  Sta- 
tius  und  anderen  eben  auch  auf  Aristoteles'  Historia  animalium  oder  auf  Plinius' 
Naturalis  historia. 

Das  Dichterselbstverstandnis  wird  seit  alter  Zeit  im  Verhaltnis  des  Dich- 
ters  zu  den  Musen  analysiert.^''  Die  Musenanrufe  in  der  Austrias  sind  keine 
Unterwerfungsbitten  mehr,  auch  keine  Inspirationsbitten,  sie  sind  vielmehr 


38  QUO   ME  PHOEBE  RAPIS 

streng  formalisiert.  Besonders  wichtige  Ereignisse,  entscheidende  Schlachten 
und  Hohepunkte,  werden  durch  die  Musenanrufung  eingeleitet.  Der  Musen- 
anruf  dient  Bartolini  wie  Vergil  und  seinen  Nachfolgern  zur  Verzierung  der 
Erzahlung  und  zur  Hervorhebung  der  Hohepunkte.  So  wird  die  Entschei- 
dungsschlacht  im  zehnten  Buch  durch  die  Anrufung  von  Erato  eingeleitet: 
"Adsis  o  Erato.  ..."  Auch  Exkurse  werden  durch  eine  Anrufung  geschickt  her- 
ausgehoben:  die  invocatio  "quo  me  Phoebe  rapis?"  (eine  Reminiszenz  an  Horaz, 
Carmina  3,  25:  "Quo  me,  Bacche,  rapis  tui  /  plenum?.  .  .")  leitet  eine  vaticinatio 
iiber  die  Reise  von  Maximilians  Sohn  Philipp  im  Herbst  1505  nach  Spanien 
ein,  dessen  Schiffbruch  auf  der  Seereise  zu  Heinrich  VII.  nach  England  und 
sein  plotzlicher  Tod  in  Burgos  im  September  1506  vorhergesagt  werden. ^^ 
Bartolini  hatte  diese  Ereignisse  wahrend  seines  ersten  Aufenthaltes  in  Deutsch- 
land  mitverfolgen  konnen  und  sie  dann  in  seinem  Epos  als  Weissagung 
kiinftiger  Entwicklung  eingearbeitet  (die  Handlung  des  Krieges  spielt  im  Jahre 
1504). 

Die  Musenanrufungen,  genauso  wie  die  Aufnahme  der  fabellae  und  der  my- 
thischen  Gotterwelt,  dienen  nach  Meinung  Bartolinis  in  seinem  Begleitbrief 
der  "delectatio"  des  Lesers.  Sie  dienen  ausdriicklich  dazu,  wie  Bartolini  in  einem 
Brief  an  Gianfrancesco  Pico  della  Mirandola  weiter  ausfiihrt,^^  dem  Leser 
Freude  zu  bereiten  und  das  Lob  fiir  den  Kaiser  zu  verdeutlichen.  Im  gleichen 
Brief  gibt  Bartolini  entscheidende  Hinweise  auf  die  allegorische  Einkleidung 
seines  Epos.  Er  beruft  sich  auf  die  Antike  mit  der  rhetorischen  Frage,  was  denn 
von  der  Aussage  Homers  und  Hesiods  bliebe,  wenn  man  aus  ihren  Werken 
die  Gotter  entfernte?  Was  bliebe  von  der  Wirkung  der  Aneis,  wenn  man  Juno 
und  Venus  wegnahme?  Die  Leser  wiirden  keine  Freude  am  Stoff  mehr  fmden! 
Die  Aussageabsicht  wird  daher  in  allegorischen  Bildern  verdeutlicht,  die  gleich- 
zeitig  zur  "iucunditas"  der  Leser  beitragen.  So  kann  er  den  Kaiser  als  idealen 
Fiirsten  zeigen,  der  "sapientia  et  fortitudo"  in  einer  Person  vereinigt,  der  sogar 
Venus  besiegt  und  damit  die  "voluptas."  Auch  Vadian  beschreibt  in  seiner  Poe- 
tik  den  Musenanruf  als  "Bewahrung  des  Schmucks  der  alten  Dichtkunst"  und 
spricht  mehrfach  von  den  "uralten  Dichterbrauchen  der  Musenanrufung."  Er 
sagt:  "bei  den  Musenanrufen  bediene  ich  mich  der  farbenfrohen  Ausdrucks- 
form  der  Dichtung."*^  Die  Musen  fungieren  nicht  mehr  als  Gottinnen,  son- 
dern  als  Hilfen  fiir  das  Verstandnis  des  Lesers;  Vadian  gelangt  zu  dieser 
Erklarung  durch  eine  Interpretation  der  Theogonie  von  Hesiod,  die  er  von  Bar- 
tolini in  lateinischer  Ubersetzung  erhalten  hatte.  Da  Vadian  nur  wenig  Grie- 
chischkenntnisse  besafi,  griff  er  an  verschiedenen  Stellen  seiner  Poetik  auf  die 
bewahrten  Kenntnisse  seines  Freundes  Bartolini  zuriick.'^^ 

Bartolinis  Dichterselbstverstandnis  und  seine  Auffassung  von  den  Musen 
werden  am  besten  in  der  beigegebenen  Protestatio  zur  Austrias  deutlich:  darin 
formuliert  Bartolini: 

.  .  .  canimus  nullis  tentata  Camoenis 


STEPHAN  fOsSEL  39 

Arma  prius,  Cyrrhaeque  ferens  de  vertice  Musas 


Primus  ego  ingredior  Germana  per  oppida  vates 


42 


In  zwei  topischen  Wendungen  betont  Bartolini,  dafi  er  2ils  erster  diese  Kriege 
besungen  habe  und,  die  Musen  vom  Helicongipfel  tragend,  als  erster  durch 
die  deutschen  Stadte  schreite.  Bartolini  nimmt  damit  direkt  Bezug  zu  Vergils 
Aussage  im  dritten  Prooemium  der  Georgica  (3,  lOf.),  in  dem  Vergil  von  der 
triumphalen  Heimbringung  der  pindarischen  Musen  vom  Helicon  spricht.  Wie 
Vergil  an  der  Stelle  ein  Siegeslied  ankiindigt  und  beansprucht,  die  pindarische 
Aufgabe  in  Rom  und  fiir  Italien  iibernommen  zu  haben,  so  sehen  wir  hier 
Bartolini  als  Uberbringer  der  Musen  nach  Deutschland.  Dies  klingt  wie  eine 
Antwort  auf  die  zwanzigjahre  zuvor  vorgetragene  Bitte  des  Celtis  an  Apollo: 
"komm,  so  flehen  wir,  drum  zu  unseren  Kiisten,  wie  Italiens  Lande  du  einst 
besuchtest,  mag  Barbarensprache  dann  flieh'n  und  alles  Dunkel  ver- 
schwinden."'^^  Bartolini  glaubt,  diese  Bitte  einlosen  zu  konnen  und  nun  die 
Dichtkunst  iiber  die  Alpen  zu  bringen.  Nicht  nur  die  Leistung  seines  Epos 
spornt  ihn  dazu  an,  sondern  auch  die  Idee,  nur  in  der  "lingua  latina"  Bildung, 
Eruditat  vermitteln  zu  konnen.  Er  polemisiert  gegen  die  "indocti,"  die  in  der 
"vernacula  lingua"  stolperten,  und  fordert,  die  Grofie  und  Bedeutung  eines 
Herrschers  nicht  "inerudite  incompteque"  zu  beschreiben,  sondern  "verborum 
cultu  atque  ornatu"  — den  Regeln  der  Grammatik  und  Rhetorik  gemafi.*'^ 
Wahrend  ab  1480  in  Italien  der  Primat  der  lateinischen  Sprache  zugunsten 
des  volgare  aufgegeben  wurde,"^^  konnte  Bartolini  in  der  Phase  der  Hochrenais- 
sance  nordlich  der  Alpen  noch  dieses  Bildungsprogramm  vertreten.  So  be- 
dauerte  etwa  auch  Celtis  in  seiner  Vorrede  der  Epitoma  in  utramque  Ciceronis 
rhetoricam,  dafi  die  Taten  Maximilians  noch  nicht  in  "Rhomana  eloquentia"  be- 
sungen seien,  was  allein  ewigen  Ruhm  gewahrleiste.  Und  auch  Cuspinian 
forderte,  dafi  ein  Geschichtsschreiber  Maximilians,  "qualis  Achilli  erat  Home- 
rus,"  nur  unter  den  '*nobilissima  in  omni  doctrinarum  genere  ingenia,  exer- 
citataque  Uteris  Graecis  ac  Latinis"  zu  suchen  sei.'^^  Wie  Vergil  als 
Triumphator  die  Musen  heimbringt,  um  sie  im  Tempel,  dem  metaphorischen 
Bild  fiir  das  Gedicht,  des  Octavian  darzubringen,  so  versteht  auch  Bartolini 
seine  Aufgabe  als  Lobredner  Maximilians.  Wetteifernd  mit  Vergil  sucht  er  sich 
einen  zeitgenossischen  Reprasentanten,  dem  er  seine  Verherrlichung  zukom- 
men  lassen  konnte,  um  seine  erudite  Bildung  dichterisch  darstellen  zu  konnen. 
So  fanden  in  Bartolini  und  Maximilian  zwei  Gestalten  zusammen,  deren  Dis- 
position zum  Dichter  und  deren  Auffassung  von  Wesen  und  Macht  der  Dich- 
tung  sich  auf  das  Beste  erganzten.  Der  marone  Perugino  fand  den  Augustus  germanus . 


40  QUO   ME   PHOEBE  RAPIS 

Anmerkungen 


1.  H.  Wiesflecker,  Kaiser  Maximilian  I.  Das  Reich,  Osterreich  und  Europa  an  der  Wende 
zur  Nenzeit,  5  Bde.,  Wien/Miinchen  1971-1986;  J. -D.  Miiller,  Gedechtnus.  Literatur  und 
Hofgesellschaft  um  Maximilian  I.,  Miinchen  1982  (=  Forschungen  zur  Geschichte  der 
Alteren  deutschen  Literatur  2). 

2.  Wiesflecker,  Maximilian  I.,  Bd.  3,  505. 

3.  Ebd.  Bd.  5,  314. 

4.  Ebd.  Bd.  5,  312. 

5.  Ebd.  Bd.  5,  323. 

6.  Miiller  Gedechtnus,  konstatiert  in  seinem  Vorwort  (S.  15):  ".  .  .  Daher  sind  auch 
keineswegs  vollstandig  die  literarischen  Texte  zu  erfassen  und  zu  interpretieren,  die 
etwa  zwischen  1490  und  1519  am  Maximilians  Hof  entstanden.  Reprasentativ  will  der 
Ausschnitt  freilich  fur  einen  bestimmten  Verwendungszusammenhang  von  Literatur 
sein  und  fiir  bestimmte  Gruppen  innerhalb  der  entstehenden  literarischen  Offentlich- 
keit  der  friihen  Neuzeit." 

7.  Ebd.,  207. 

8.  Vgl.  den  resiimierenden  Vortrag  von  Miiller,  "Deutsch-lateinische  Panegyrik  am 
Kaiserhof  und  die  Entstehung  eines  neuen  hofischen  Publikums  in  Deutschland,"  in: 
Europdische  Hofkultur  im  16.  und  17.  Jahrhundert,  hg.v.  August  Buck,  Georg  Kauffmann, 
Blake  Lee  Spahr  und  Conrad  Wiedemann,  Bd.  2,  Hamburg  1981,  133-40,  hier  137 
(  =   Wolfenbiitteler  Arbeiten  zur  Barockforschung  9). 

9.  F.  Ohly,  "Bemerkungen  eines  Philologen  zur  Memoria,"  in:  Memoria.  Der geschicht- 
liche  Zeugniswert  des  liturgischen  Gedenkens  im  Mittelalter,  hg.v.  Karl  Schmid,  Joachim  Wol- 
lasch,  Miinchen  1984,  9-68,  hier  45  (  =  Miinstersche  Mittelalter-Schriften  48).  Ohlys 
weitere  Einschatzung  des  "von  Gottes  Gedachtnis  absehende[n]  Wort[s]  des  Weifi- 
kunig:  'Wer  ime  in  seinem  leben  kain  gedachtnus  macht.  .  .,'  "  ebd.  S.  45,  erscheint 
bei  einer  Gesamtwiirdigung  von  Maximilians  Personlichkeit,  die  von  tiefer  Religi- 
ositat  und  Sorge  um  das  ewige  Heil  gepragt  war,  unzutreffend. 

10.  Vgl.  Verf.,  "Der  Einflufi  der  italienischen  Humanisten  auf  die  zeitgenossischen 
Darstellungen  Kaiser  Maximilians  L,"  in:  Acta  Conventus  Neo-Latini  Bononiensis,  ed.  by 
R.  J.  Schoeck.  (Medieval  &  Renaissance  Texts  &  Studies,  vol.  37)  Binghamton,  NY, 
1985,  34-43. 

11.  Zu  Bartolini  vgl.  G.  B.  Vermiglioli:  Biografia  degli  scrittori  Perugini  e  notizie  delle 
opereloro,  Vol.  1.,  Perugia  1928,  188-97;  St.  Fiissel,  Riccardus  Bartholinus  Perusinus.  Hu- 
manistische  Panegyrik  am  Hofe  Kaiser  Maximilians  I. ,  Baden-Baden  1987  (  =  Saecvla  Spiri- 
talia  16). 

12.  Es  bestanden  mehrfach  Plane  deutscher  Humanisten,  ein  eigenstandiges  na- 
tionals Epos  in  der  Nachfolge  Vergils  zu  schaffen;  Celtis  bittet  in  seiner  Widmung 
der  Amores  den  Kaiser,  ihn  zu  einer  Maximilianeis  zu  ermuntern,  die  die  "memorabilia 
gesta"  Maximilians  selbst  verherrlichen  sollte  und  damit  im  engen  Konnex  zu  den 
zeitgenossisch-panegyrischen  Epen  der  italienischen  Renaissance  gestanden  hatte;  Dieter 
Wuttke  verweist  zusatzlich  auf  das  noch  unpublizierte  Epigramm  V,100  der  Kasseler 
Celtis-Handschrift,  das  mit  einem  Hinweis  auf  ein  "magnum  Martis  opus"  schliefit,  in 
dem  die  Geschichte  des  Reiches  bis  auf  Maximilian  dargestellt  werden  sollte,  vgl.  D. 
Wuttke,  Humanismus  als  integrative  Kraft.  Die  Philosophia  des  deutschen  'Erzhumanisten'  Con- 
rad Celtis.  Niirnberg  1985,  39  u.  Anm.  102. 

13.  Vgl.  dazu  detailliert  A.  Buck:  "Der  Begriff  des  'poeta  eruditus'  in  der  Dichtungs- 
theorie  der  italienischen  Renaissance,"  in:  Ders.:  Die  humanistische  Tradition  in  der  Ro- 
mania, Bad  Homburg  v. d.H. /Berlin/Zurich  1968,  227-42,  hier  230. 


STEPHAN   FUSSEL  4I 


14.  Vgl.  zum  Exempel  Leonardo  Brunis  Dichterdefinition,  die  die  Forderung  nach 
Kenntnissen  in  "filosofia,  teologia,  astrologia,  aritmetica,  per  lezione  di  storie"  einschlofi, 
vgl.  Leonardo  Bruni  Aretino,  Le  vite  di  Dante  e  di  Petrarca  (1436),  in:  Humanistisch- 
philosophische  Schriften,  hg.u.  erl.v.  H.  Baron,  Leipzig/Berlin  1928,  50-69,  hier  60. 

15.  Der  Kommentar  hat  sich  in  einer  Abschrift  seines  Freundes  und  Schiilers,  Ro- 
berto Scatassi,  erhalten,  der  das  Manuskript  dem  Kaiserlichen  Rat  und  Bischof  von 
Triest,  Petrus  Bonomus,  zur  Veroffentlichung  iibergab;  es  blieb  aber  unpubliziert  und 
fand  m.W.  bisher  keine  Beachtung;  es  liegt  heute  in  der  Osterreichischen  National- 
bibliothek  in  Wien,  Sign.:  Cod.  Vind.  9474. 

16.  G.  N.  Knauer  zieht  in  seiner  einschlagigen  Monographie  Vergil-Kommentare 
ab  ca.  1520  zu  Rate,  Bartolini  blieb  ihm  verborgen,  vgl.  Ders.,  Die  Aeneis  und  Homer. 
Studien  zur  poetischen  Technik  Vergils  mit  Listen  der  Homerzitate  in  der  Aeneis,  Gottingen  2. 
Aufl.  1979  (=   Hypomnemata  7). 

17.  Vgl.  Complvrivm  eruditorum  uatum  carmina  ad  magnificum  uirum  D.Blasium  Holce- 
lium.  .  .,  Augustae  Vindelicorum  M.D.XVIIL  Ex.:  Herzog  August  Bibliothek  Wol- 
fenbuttel.  Sign.:  56:1. Poet  (6)  4°;  der  Beitrag  Bartolinis  Fol.  Bi'^-Bii''. 

18.  Vs.  32  f.: 

.  .  .  sed  vitare  hominum  vulgus  inertium 
Si  a  te  (mi  sat  erit)  vatibus  inserar. 

Horaz  hatte  in  diesem  Zusammenhang  starker  die  Andersartigkeit  der  Dichter  betont 
und  neutraler  formuliert:  'Secernunt  populo  .  .  .'  {Carm.   1,1,  Vs.  32). 

19.  RICARDI BARTHOLINI  Carmen  Geniale  ac  laudabundum  de  CAROLO  Hispaniarum 
Rege,  nuper  in  Romanorum  Regem  Francofortae  electa.  Argentorati  apud  loannem  Scotum 
1519.  Ex.:  Bibl.  Nationale  Paris,  Sign.:  Res. M. 361. 

20.  Vs.  85  f.: 

Exomat  vates,  quibus  est  facundia  versu 
Aeternos  dandi  factis  ingentibus  annis. 

21 .  Riccardi  Bartolini  Perusini  in  historiam  lornandis  de  rebus  Gothicis  carmen  ad  Conradum 
CSc,  in:  lornandes  de  rebus  Gothorum,  ed.  Conrad  Peutinger.  Augustae  Vindelicorum: 
Joannes  Miller  1515,  Fol.  Aiif ,  Ex.:  UB  Giefien,  Sign.:  Ink.L5715  fol.  ]   Vs.  1  f.: 

Multum  praedarae  debent  scriptoribus  umbrae 
Quorum  perpetuat  fortia  gesta  labor. 

22.  Riccardo  Bartolini:  Odeporicon.  Wien  1515.  Fol.  A3^  Ex.:  Herzog  August  Bib- 
liothek Wolfenbiittel,  Sign.:  92.17  Hist.  8°  (Pergamentex.). 

23.  Bartolini,  Praelectio  (wie  Anm.l5)  Fol  52"^  spricht  in  Abanderung  der  klassischen 
Ciceronischen  Formulierung  statt  von  "vita  memoriae"  von  "vitae  memoria"  und  dup- 
liziert  damit  den  Aspekt  "nuntia  vetustatis." 

24.  Vgl.  Anm.  21. 

25.  Threnodia  sev  lamentatio  Petri  Aegidij  in  obitum  Maximiliani  Caesaris  Aug. ,  Augustae 
Vindelicorum:  Ex  officina  Sigismundi  Grimm  Medici  &  Marci  Vuirsung.  M.D.XIX. 
Die  Scholien  Spiegels  Fol.  Aaij^-Bbii^ 

26.  Die  Vadianische  Briefsammlung  der  Stadtbibliothek  St.  Gallen,  hg.v.  E.  Arbenz  und  H. 
Wartmann,  in:  Mitteilungen  zur  Vaterlandischen  Geschichte  3.  Folge.  XXIV  (1890), 
XXV  (1893),  XXVI-XXXa  (1894-1913),  hier  Brief  Nr.  108,  Bartolini  an  Vadian  vom 
15.11.1517. 

27.  Die  erste  deutsche  Ubersetzung  vom  Jahre  1486  stammt  vom  Ulmer  Patrizier 
Hans  Neithart,  vgl.  H.  M.  Mangold,  Studien  zu  den  dltesten  Biihnenverdeutschungen  des  Te- 
renz,  Halle  1912  (  «  Hermaea  X);  Mangold  kennt  diesen  Brief  durch  indirekte  Belege, 


42  QUO  ME  PHOEBE  RAPIS 


verfolgt  die  Spur  aber  nicht,  da  der  Text  vermutlich  verloren  ist. 

28.  Caspar  Ursinus  Velius  an  Vadian  vom  23.  Juli  1516,  vgl.  Vadian-BW  Nr.  124. 

29.  Maximilian  bezwingt  Pallas,  die  von  Merkur  in  den  Olymp  gerettet  wird,  Au- 
strias  5,  787  £F.  nach  Homer,  Ilias  5,  357-67;  vgl.  Fiissel,  Bartholinus  (wie  Anm.  10) 
Kap.  Ill,  4. 

30.  Brief  Bartolinis  an  Schiirer  aus  Wien  vom  27.  Juli  1515;  Autograph  im  Nachlafi 
von  Melchior  Goldast  in  der  UB  Bremen,  Sign.:  VIII,  374,  Bl.  3,  Zitate  hier  normalisiert. 

31.  Die  Dedikationsepisteln  von  und  an  Vadian,  hg.v.  C.  Bonorand  und  H.  Haffter,  St. 
Gallen  1983  (  =  Vadian  Studien  11),  Edition  S.  95-98,  hier  Kommentar  S.  100:  "Die 
Uberlegungen,  wie  sie  hier  von  Vadian  zur  Schreibweise  von  Flufi-,  Volks-  und  Stadt- 
namen  vorgebracht  werden,  konnten  Ansatzpunkte  wissenschaftlicher  Etymologie  dar- 
stellen." 

32.  J.  Vadianus,  De poetica  et  carminis  ratione,  Krit.  Ausgabe  mit  dt.  Ubersetzung  und 
Kommentar,  3  Bde.,  Miinchen  1973-77,  hier  III,  124.  Schaffer  zitiert  diesen  Brief 
als  "Zusammenfassung  einiger  Hauptgedanken  unseres  Buches  [=   der  Poetik]." 

33.  Vgl.o.  Anm.  30. 

34.  Vadians  Widmungsvorrede  der  Austrias  an  Kardinal  Lang,  vgl.  Austrias  Fol.  iiii"^: 
"sunt  his  intertexta  ex  Physicis,  Astronomicisque  petita  loca,  sunt  amoenae  et  signatae 
regionum,  populorum,  montium  fluminumque  maxime  ad  Germaniam  pertinentium 
descriptiones.  ..." 

35.  Joannjs  Francisci  Camoeni  Perusini Miradoniae  libri  duo.  Venedig  1520,  Fol.  XXXIII"^. 
Ex.:  Bibl.  Augusta  Perugia,  Sign.:  Misc.  I, C, 39.  —  Zur  Einheit  von  Humanismus  und 
Naturwissenschaft  um  1500  vgl.  nun  D.  Wuttke,  "Beobachtungen  zum  Verhaltnis  von 
Humanismus  und  Naturwissenschaft  im  deutschsprachigen  Raum,"  in:  121.  Bericht  des 
Historischen  Vereins  Bamberg,  1985,  1-16. 

36.  Richardi  Bartholini  Perusini,  Austriados  Libri  XII,  cum  scholiis  lacobi  Spiegelij,  Argen- 
torati:  Johannes  Schott  1531.  Ex.:  SUB  Gottingen,  4"^  H.  Germ.  V,  2092. 

37.  Vgl.u.a.  W.J.  Verdenius,  The  Principles  of  Greek  Literary  Criticism,  Leiden  1983. 

38.  Austrias  9,  58  ff.;  zum  hist.  Hintergrund  vgl.  Wiesflecker  (wie  Anm.  2)  Bd.  3, 
255-306. 

39.  "lUustri  domino  loanni  Francisco  Pico  Mirandulae  Principi  Riccardus  Bartho- 
linus foelicitatem  D.,"  in:  Austrias,  vij'^-viij'^. 

40.  Vadian,  De  poetica  et  carminis  ratione,  ed.  Schaffer  (wie  Anm.  32)  Tit.  XXII  "De 
musis  et  earum  nominibus  quid  intellectum,"  Bd.  1,  192-205,  hier  204. 

41.  Ebd.  194  gibt  Vadian  nach  dem  lateinischen  Zitat  der  Theogonie,  Vs.  22-34  an: 
"Hactenus  Hesiodus,  metaphraste  Richardo  Bartholino  doctissimo  Poeta,  cuius  emunc- 
tissimo  carmine  Latina  nuper  facta  tota  Genealogia  penes  me  est"  und  wiirdigt  ihn 
ausfiihriich  nachfolgend  S.  272:  "lam  RICCARDUS  BARTHOLINUS,  cuius  nuper 
pleni  ingenii,  doctrinae  et  elegantiae  Austriados  libri  editi  sunt,  quo  insignis  poetae  mu- 
nere  caret?  aut  quid  tandem  obsit  quominus  inter  epicos  Poetas  numeretur?  Tersa  mihi 
in  eo  omnia  videntur  ipsaque  condigna  posteritate." 

42.  "Avthoris  ad  posteritatem  protestatio,"  in:  Austrias  Fol.  Bbiij^.  Seit  Mitte  des  15. 
Jh.s  Peter  Luder  mit  programmatischer  Vergil-imitatio  erklart  hatte: 

Primus  ego  in  patriam  deduxi  vertice  Musas 
Italico  mecum,  fonte  Guarine  tuo. 

fmdet  sich  diese  Sentenz  haufigbei  deutschen  Scholaren;  sie  gewinnt  bei  Bartolini  neues 
Gewicht,  da  nun  ein  Italiener  die  Musen  selbst  iiber  die  Alpen  fuhrt. 

43.  Sic  veHs  nostras,  rogitamus,  oras 

Italas  ceu  quondam  aditare  terras; 
Barbarus  sermo  fugiatque,  ut  atrum 
Subruat  omne. 


STEPHAN   FUSSEL  43 

Vs.  21-24  der  Ode  "Ad  Apollinem  repertorem  poetices  ut  ab  Italis  cum  lyra  ad  Ger- 
manos  veniat,"  in:  Ars  versificandi  et  carminum.  Leipzig  1486,  fol.  24*^.  Vgl.  St.  Fiissel, 
"  'Barbarus  sermo  fugiat.  .  .  .'  Uber  das  Verhaltnis  der  Humanisten  zur  Volkssprache," 
in:  Pirckheimer  1,  1985,  S.  71-110. 

44.  Bartolini,  Odeporicon,  hier  "Ad  lectorem,"  fol.  Qy^. 

45.  Vgl.  P.  O.  Kristeller,  "Ursprung  und  Entwicklung  der  italienischen  Prosasprache," 
in:  Ders.:  Humanismus  und  Renaissance  II,  Munchen  1976,  312-148;  E.  Kessler,  "Zur 
Bedeutung  der  lateinischen  Sprache  in  der  Renaissance,"  in:  Acta  Conventus  Neo-Latini 
Bononiensis,  ed.  by  R.  J.  Schoeck,  Binghamton  N.Y.  1985,  337-55. 

46.  Der  Briefwechsel  des  Konrad  Celtis,  hg.v.  H.  Rupprich,  Munchen  1934,  Nr.  25, 
42-45,  hier  44. 

47.  loannis  Cuspiniani  .  .  .  De  Caesaribus  atque  Imperatoribus  Romanis  opus  insigne.  .  ., 
Basileae  1561,  601. 


The  CatuUan  Lectures  of  Pierius  Valerianus 
Julia  Haig  Gaisser 

Pierius  Valerianus  (1477-1558)  is  best  known  for  his  monumental  Hiero- 
glyphica  and  the  short  dialogue  De  litteratorum  infelicitate,  which  was 
inspired  by  the  destruction  of  books  and  the  suffering  of  individual 
scholars  during  the  Sack  of  Rome  (1527),  but  he  was  also  a  Neo-Latin  poet 
and  a  student  of  ancient  poetry.  In  1521-1522  he  delivered  a  series  of  lectures 
on  Catullus  at  the  University  of  Rome.  These  were  taken  down  as  he  deliv- 
ered them,  at  the  orders  of  his  friend  and  student,  the  poet  Petrus  Melinus, 
and  the  manuscript  (or  rather,  manuscript  fragment)  of  the  lectures  is  to  be 
found  in  the  Vatican  Library.^ 

For  the  most  part  Valerianus'  lectures  make  good  reading,  but  no  doubt  they 
were  even  better  to  listen  to.  His  manner  is  relaxed,  and  he  seems  to  have  an 
easy  rapport  with  his  students,  who  were  in  the  habit  of  asking  questions  after 
class  or  meeting  him  on  the  way  to  the  lecture  hall  with  requests  for  discussion 
of  various  points.  The  lectures  are  structured  like  a  commentary:  the  discus- 
sion of  each  poem  begins  with  a  summary,  which  contains  his  interpretation 
and  metrical  observations,  and  continues  with  line-by-line  and  sometimes 
word-by- word  explanation.  The  discussion  is  full,  if  not  prolix.  Perhaps  I  can 
convey  its  magnitude  best  by  saying  that  the  manuscript  fragment  contains 
249  folios  (2ilmost  500  pages)  and  breaks  off  after  the  discussion  of  Cat.  22  —  with 
over  ninety  poems  to  go. 

Valerianus  is  interested  in  many  of  the  same  questions  as  other  Renaissance 
commentators,  but  he  is  the  first  to  come  to  the  text  as  a  poet.  He  has  what 
one  might  call  a  professional  interest  in  the  technical  details  of  diction  and  met- 
rics, and  he  is  eager  to  show  his  students  how  they  can  imitate  Catullan  tech- 
nique in  their  own  Neo-Latin  poetry,  as  he  says  at  the  end  of  his  second  lecture. 

Age  esto  Catullus  primus  qui  profecturis  in  poeticae  discipulis  propo- 
natur,  ut  quum  unusquisque  in  eum  ex  numeris  incident  qui  genio  suo 
sit  accommodatior,  quo  scilicet  se  non  aliter  moveri  atque  attrsdii  sentiat 


^6  CATULLAN   LECTURES  OF  PIERIUS  VALERIANUS 

quam  ferrum  a  magnete,  paleam  a  succino,  se  ad  eius  imitationem  ac- 
cingat,  eoque  carminis  genere  sese  exercere  incipiat  quod  magis  ideae 
suae  proprium  esse  animadverterit.  (fol.  25) 

Versification  was  basic  to  Valerianus'  budding  poets,  and  Catullus'  varied 
meters  were  to  be  their  text.  The  students  were  at  several  levels  of  metrical 
proficiency.  Some,  like  Petrus  Melinus  (who  was  already  an  accomplished  poet), 
were  Valerianus'  near  contemporaries.  Others  were  young,  and  required  rather 
elementary  instruction.  In  his  discussion  of  hendecasyllables  (Lecture  Three), 
Valerianus  caters  elegantly  to  both,  tempering  sophisticated  and  virtuoso 
demonstrations  with  basic  information  for  the  iuniores.  For  the  iuniores  he  de- 
scribes the  meter  as  consisting  of  five  feet  — a  spondee,  a  dactyl,  and  three  tro- 
chees, but  for  the  advanced  students  he  presents  a  detailed  analysis,  which  is 
based  on  the  principle  that  verse  may  be  divided  in  various  ways  and  that  dif- 
ferent meters  can  be  achieved  simply  by  omitting,  adding,  or  transposing  seg- 
ments. An  elaborate  technical  discussion  follows,  in  which  he  turns  the 
hendecasyllables  of  Cat.  1  into  dactyls,  iambs,  glyconics,  asclepiadians,  and 
even  galliambics.  The  intent  of  these  manipulations  is  not  to  produce  great 
poetry,  but  to  show  his  students  how  to  take  a  meter  apart  and  put  it  back 
together  again  — as  something  else.  Whatever  modern  critics  may  think  of  such 
poetic  games,  it  seems  likely  that  Catullus  is  referring  to  something  of  the  sort 
in  his  famous  poem  to  Calvus: 

Hesterno,  Licini,  die  otiosi 
multum  lusimus  in  meis  tabellis, 
ut  convenerat  esse  delicatos: 
scribens  versiculos  uterque  nostrum 
ludebat  numero  modo  hoc  modo  illoc, 
reddens  mutua  per  iocum  atque  vinum. 

(Cat.  50.1-6) 

Since  play  (ludere)  is  at  the  heart  of  lyric  composition  for  both  antiquity  and 
the  Renaissance,  one  would  like  very  much  to  have  Valerianus'  remarks  on 
Cat.  50. 

But  Valerianus'  interest  in  meter  is  not  merely  mechanical.  He  wants  his 
audience  to  hear  its  music  and  judge  its  effects.  As  early  as  Pliny  the  Elder, 
Catullus  had  been  criticized  for  allowing  an  iamb  or  trochee  to  substitute  for 
the  more  usual  spondaic  opening  of  the  hendecasyllable.  In  Cat.  1,  for  ex- 
ample, line  2  opens  with  a  trochee,  line  4  with  an  iamb.  In  recent  times  Otto 
Skutsch  has  demonstrated  that  this  variation  was  a  neoteric  experiment,^  but 
to  Pliny  it  seemed  merely  harsh  (duriusculum),  and  in  quoting  line  4  he  rear- 
ranged the  verse  to  achieve  a  smoother  effect: 

namque  tu  solebas 
nugas  esse  aliquid  meas  putare 


JULIA  HAIG  GAISSER  4^ 

ut  obiter  emolliam  CatuUum  concerraneum  meum  —  agnoscis  et  hoc  castrense 
verbum  — (ille  enim,  ut  scis,  permutatis  prioribus  syllabis  duriusculum  se  fecit 
quam  volebat  existimari  a  Veraniolis  suis  et  Fabuilis).  .  .  .  (Pliny,  Nat.  Hist., 
pref.  1) 

Valerianus  shows  another  way  to  arrive  at  a  spondaic  opening  {nostras  esse  a- 
liquid  putare  nugas,  Vat.  lat.  5215,  fol.  32v),  but  scorns  it  as  much  as  PUny's 
version,  and  tries  to  persuade  his  students  that  Catullus'  own  meas  esse  aliquid 
putare  nugas  has  a  sweetness  or  smoothness  that  is  soft  {mollis)  and  flowing,  while 
the  alternatives  are  harsh  and  displeasing.  Of  course,  Valerianus  does  not  iden- 
tify Catullus'  licence  as  a  neoteric  experiment,  but  he  understands  something 
of  the  elegance  and  lightness  that  Catullus  was  aiming  for.  Short  syllables,  he 
argues,  are  lighter  and  softer  than  long  ones,  and  iambs  or  trochees  smoother 
than  spondees. 

Pliny  is  not  the  only  target  here.  Renaissance  poets  liked  using  hendeca- 
syllables,  and  Renaissance  purists  wanted  to  restrict  them  to  spondaic  open- 
ings. Avantius'  commentary  on  the  Priapea  at  the  end  of  the  fifteenth  century, 
for  example,  was  inspired  by  the  problem.^  He  concluded  that  only  spondaic 
openings  were  found  in  the  Priapea,  and  that  although  Catullus  was  a  fme  poet, 
modern  writers  (who  knew  better)  should  not  imitate  this  aspect  of  his  style. 
Valerianus  has  a  sharp  response  to  such  pedantry: 

.  .  .  debere  grammaticos  canonas  suos  ex  antiquorum  poetarum  usu  con- 
ficere,  non  autem  veteres  poetas  ex  iuniorum  grammaticorum  imperitia 
culpari.  .  .  .  (fol.  30v). 

In  one  sense,  Valerianus'  position  is  conservative,  for  he  proceeds  from  the 
assumption  that  scholars  must  judge  ancient  authors  on  their  own  terms.  Ob- 
servation of  ancient  usage,  rather  than  procrustean  modern  theory,  is  the  key 
to  interpretation.  This  conservatism  extends  also  to  Valerianus'  work  as  a  tex- 
tual critic.  His  lectures  are  far  from  being  the  first  Renaissance  treatment  of 
Catullus,  but  they  are  still  early  enough  that  we  might  hope  to  see  some  novel 
approaches  to  the  text  or  to  find  that  he  anticipated  some  later  emendations. 
I  cannot  say  positively  that  he  made  no  such  contribution,  but  I  have  found 
none  in  my  reading  of  the  manuscript.  Rather,  he  is  concerned  to  explain  and 
vindicate  the  text  of  the  manuscripts  and  early  editions  and  to  defend  it  from 
modern  improvements. 

In  the  process  he  provides  some  valuable  information  about  contemporary 
interpretations  and  the  state  of  contemporary  Catullan  scholarship.  This  is  all 
the  more  welcome  since  there  is  a  gap  of  twenty  years  between  the  Emenda- 
tiones  of  Hieronymus  Avantius  (1495  and  1500)  and  the  two  Catullan  events 
of  1521— the  commentary  of  Alexander  Guarinus  and  the  lectures  of  Valer- 
ianus.'^ In  the  interim  the  manuscript  annotations  of  Franciscus  Puccius  had 
begun  to  circulate  through  Naples  and  Florence  (and  perhaps  Rome  as  well), 


4b  CATULLAN   LECTURES  OF  PIERIUS  VALERIANUS 

Parrhasius  had  begun  and  abandoned  a  commentary,  and  the  fame  of  Pon- 
tanus'  early  work  on  Catullus  had  provoked  the  curiosity  of  his  fellow  poets 
and  scholars.^  Catullus  was  actively  studied  in  Naples  and  Rome  in  this  per- 
iod, but  apart  from  Puccius'  jejune  notes  and  Parrhasius'  incomplete  com- 
mentary, we  are  in  the  dark  about  the  results.  Valerianus  may  not  fill  in  the 
blanks  completely,  but  he  was  in  a  position  to  know  what  was  going  on,  and 
given  the  chatty  nature  of  his  lectures,  we  can  expect  him  to  tell  us. 

One  of  his  most  important  contributions  is  to  clear  up  the  mystery  of  Pon- 
tanus'  notes.  Pontanus  (d.  1503)  worked  on  Catullus,  and  contemporary  sour- 
ces quote  one  or  two  of  his  emendations.  His  friend  and  editor,  Summontius, 
calls  Pontanus'  efforts  commentarioli,  a  designation  that  has  inspired  searches 
for  a  commentary  in  most  of  the  libraries  of  Europe.  Summontius  himself  was 
never  able  to  obtain  the  work,  although  he  had  been  commissioned  to  do  so 
by  the  Roman  collector,  Angelus  Colottius,  who  was  still  trying  to  lay  his  hands 
on  it  as  late  as  1548.^  The  work  is  probably  lost,  but  at  least  Valerianus  tells 
us  what  it  was  in  his  remarks  on  Catullus  1.9.  The  discussion  also  nicely  il- 
lustrates his  attitude  to  textual  innovation: 

Verum  hie  operae  precium  est  varias  multorum  opiniones  percurrere, 
qui  locum  hunc  diversis  modis  [diversimode,  MS]  capiunt,  mutant,  in- 
vertunt.  Ut  vero  eos  missos  faciam  qui  tam  impudenter  castam  lectio- 
nem  ausi  sunt  pervertere,  ne  dicam  vitiare  dum  legitimis  verbis  expunctis 
adulterinum  hemistichium  imprimendum  curavere:  Ora  per  virorum; 
quoque  impudentiam  tueantur  suam  falso  lovianum  Pontanum  hoc  pro 
CatuUiano  publicasse  obiectant.  Sed  enim  scio  ego  ex  fide  dignis  ho- 
minibus  lovianum  Pontanum  virum  in  re  litteraria  aetate  nostra  sum- 
mum  non  eo  consilio  in  sui  codicis  margine  scripsisse  qualecumque  quidem 
ora  per  virorum  vel  qualecumque  quod  ora  per  virorum,  ut  eam  pro  CatuUiana 
lectione  venditaret,  sed  quia  solebat  animi  gratia  cum  auctoribus  ita  iocari, 
quo  ingenium  ipse  suum  experiretur  et  stilum  exerceret.  (fol.  42-42v) 

Thus,  we  may  infer  from  Valerianus  that  Pontanus  produced,  not  a  com- 
mentary, but  a  creative  rewriting  of  troublesome  passages.  Valerianus'  explicit 
statement  confirms  the  hints  given  by  two  other  contemporary  sources  — 
Parrhasius  and  Sannazaro.  In  his  note  on  Cat.  1.9  Parrhasius  says: 

Nee  omittam  quae  acri  ingenio  gravique  iudicio  poeta  Pontanus  emen- 
dabat.  qualecunque  quod  ora  per  virorum.  Quod  ipse  Catullus  etiam  si  suum 
non  sit  pro  suo  libenter  agnoscat.  (Naples,  Bibl.  Naz.  Ms.  13.B.  12,  fol.  4) 

Sannazaro  commemorates  Pontanus'  work  in  an  epigram: 

De  emendatione  Catulli  ad  lovianum 

Doctus  ab  Elysia  redeat  si  valle  Catullus 
ingratosque  trahat  Lesbia  sola  choros 


JULIA  HAIG  GAISSER  49 

non  tarn  mendosi  moerebit  damna  libelli 

gestiet  officio  quam  loviane  tuo. 
Ille  tibi  amplexus,  atque  oscula  grata  referret; 

mallet  et  hos  numeros  quam  meminisse  suos. 

(Sannazaro,  El.  1.13) 

We  still  have  no  way  of  knowing  how  many  verses  Pontanus  rewrote  or  whether 
he  jotted  his  creations  in  the  margins  of  a  manscript  or  of  a  printed  book,  al- 
though I  incline  to  the  latter. 

The  complete  commentator  or  lecturer,  of  course,  should  tell  us  not  only 
what  the  text  is,  and  what  other  people  have  said  about  it,  but  also  what  it 
means.  Valerianus  was  more  sophisticated  as  an  interpreter  of  Catullus  than 
any  of  his  predecessors,  with  the  exception  of  Poliziano,  from  whom  we  have 
a  limited  body  of  criticism  in  the  Catullan  chapters  of  the  Miscellanea^  His  ex- 
perience as  a  poet  and  his  understanding  of  metrics  enabled  him  to  treat  the 
literary  aspects  of  Catullus  more  knowledgeably  than  Parthenius  or  Palladius 
Fuscus  or  his  own  contemporary,  Alexander  Guarinus.  We  will  be  disappointed, 
however,  if  we  look  to  Valerianus  for  profound  or  creative  literary  criticism 
of  the  twentieth-century  variety.  That's  not  what  he  does.  But  he  does  have 
a  critical  methodology,  as  they  say,  and  he  applies  it  to  his  reading  of  the  poems. 

The  task  of  the  poet,  Valerianus  says  in  his  introduction,  is  sometimes  to 
benefit  his  readers,  sometimes  to  delight  them. 

Prodest  utique  quum  virtutes  celebrat,  illustrium  virorum  adoreas  inter- 
ire  non  sinit,  quorum  exemplo  reliqui  subinvitati  ad  gloriae  cupiditatem 
accendantur.  Prodest  dum  vitia  carpit,  malos  mores  exsecratur,  et  mor- 
tales  omnes  a  sceleratorum  quos  carminibus  proscindit  imitatione  co- 
natur  avertere.  Delectat  quum  amatorios  affectus  exprimit,  lepores, 
delicias,  illecebras  meditatur,  divis  laudes  canit,  epithalamia  modulatur. 
(fol.  18) 

In  the  next  paragraph  he  makes  a  more  plausible  claim  for  utility:  Catullus 
is  beneficial  because  of  his  learning,  elegance,  and  poetic  technique  —  that  is, 
he  is  useful  as  a  teacher  of  style. 

But  the  concept  of  utility  takes  its  strangest  form  in  the  discussion  of  Cat. 
10  {Varus  me  mens  ad  suos  amores),  the  poem  in  which  Catullus'  friend  Varus 
takes  him  to  visit  his  arnica—  a  tart,  it  seems,  but  not  without  her  charms.  Every- 
one remembers  what  happens  next.  Catullus  (poor  as  a  church-mouse)  cannot 
resist  claiming  to  have  brought  back  eight  litter  bearers  from  Bithynia,  although, 
as  he  says  in  an  aside,  he  had  no  slave  who  could  lift  so  much  as  the  leg  of 
a  broken  bedstead.  The  girl  calls  his  bluff  by  asking  for  the  loan  of  the  bearers 
and  Catullus  must  try  to  save  face  by  saying  that  they  aren't  really  his,  but 
his  friend  Cinna's  — which  (he  assures  her)  is  almost  the  same  thing.  But  this 
is  not  how  matters  appeared  to  Valerianus: 


50  CATULLAN   LECTURES  OF  PIERIUS  VALERIANUS 

Quod  initio  proloquiorum  nostrorum  praefati  sumus  officium  esse  poe- 
tae  vel  prodesse  vel  delectare,  ita  hactenus  verum  esse,  ex  novem  epi- 
grammatum  praelectionibus  apparuit,  ut  nulla  id  ulterius  indigeat 
probatione.  Decimum  autem  hoc  epigramma  totum  in  utilitate  consistit, 
ut  scilicet  nos  admoneat  quo  pacto  possimus  per  occasionem  impuden- 
tem  meretricum  petulantiam  atque  rapacitatem  eludere  (fols.  1 25-1 25 v) 

This  novel  interpretation  depends  on  taking  Catullus'  assertions  of  poverty  as 
a  ruse,  the  claim  to  have  bearers  as  a  lapse,  and  the  ascription  of  the  bearers 
to  Cinna  as  a  fast  recovery  to  avoid  having  to  lend  them  to  the  girl.  Valerianus 
continues: 

Et  quod  se  paulo  habere  dixerat,  nullo  rubore  perfusus,  ut  par  pari  re- 
ferret,  aberrasse  ait  se  ex  mentis  alienatione,  servos  enim  eos  non  esse 
sibi,  sed  Cinnae  sodali  suo.  .  .  .  Quumque  ita  per  insaniae  simulationem 
sapiens  evasisset  meretricis  ipsius  petulantiam  incessit  quae  adeo  sit  im- 
pudens,  ut  non  patiatur  quemquam  negligenter  aut  imprudenter  quid- 
piam  effari.  Atque  ita  alios  docet,  ut  quum  in  mores  inciderint  huiusmodi, 
sibi  constent,  et  eas  semper  ad  petendum,  ad  spoliandum,  et  exhaurien- 
dum  paratas  esse  suspicentur.  (fol.  126) 

There  is  a  certain  immediacy  about  Valerianus'  interpretation  that  makes 
one  wonder  just  what  his  students  were  up  to  in  their  spare  time,  but  in  any 
case,  the  sixteenth-century  lecture  hall  was  not  an  ivory  tower.  Both  the  lec- 
tures and  their  manuscript  were  subject  to  outside  pressures  great  and  small, 
some  of  which  are  recorded  in  the  lectures  themselves.  Valerianus  was  ap- 
pointed professor  at  the  University  of  Rome  by  Leo  X,  the  great  Medici  pa- 
tron of  art  and  letters,  2ind  began  his  CatuUan  lectures  in  the  winter  (probably 
November)  of  1521.  He  gave  only  two  lectures  (an  inaugural  lecture  and  a 
general  introduction  to  Catullus)  before  Leo  died  unexpectedly  on  December 
1 .  It  is  no  exaggeration  to  say  that  Leo's  death  was  a  catastrophe  for  everyone 
associated  with  the  papal  court.  The  mood  is  reflected  in  the  opening  of  Va- 
lerianus' third  lecture: 

Quamvis  obruit  ingenium  patientia  longa  malorum,  earumque  iactarum, 
quas  in  Leone  Decimo  Pontifice  Maximo  Domino  meo  tam  repente,  tam 
ante  diem  erepto  feci,  non  sum  tamen  tot  casibus,  tot  difficultatibus,  tot 
aerumnis,  tot  calamitatibus  ita  fractus,  ut  qui  meus  est  erga  vos  amor, 
quae  vestri  profectus  cura,  studiosi  adolescentes,  non  statim  ad  studia 
me  contulerim,  ubi  primum  in  novi  pontificis  tam  procul  accersiti  ab- 
sentia, bonarum  artium  propemodum  desolatione,  aperiri  ludum  intel- 
lexi  et  gymnasia  frequentari  conspexi.  (fol.  26) 

Valerianus'  lectures  must  have  been  suspended  for  the  whole  of  December 
and  at  least  the  first  few  days  of  January,  for  the  new  Pope  was  elected  only 


JULIA  HAIG  GAISSER  5I 

on  9  January  1522.  The  man  who  had  to  be  "summoned  from  so  far  away" 
was  Adrian  VI,  a  Dutchman,  and  the  last  non-Italian  Pope  for  450  years.  In 
January  of  1522  he  was  in  Spain  —  many  months  from  Rome  —  a  small  but  om- 
inous cloud  on  the  cultural  horizon,  for  he  was  known  to  be  strict  in  his  be- 
liefs, ascetic  by  temperament,  and  unenthusiastic  about  art  and  secular  letters. 
After  this  preface  Valerianus  resumes  his  discussion  at  the  point  where  he 
had  left  off  several  weeks  earlier,  launching  into  his  metrical  explanations  and 
general  observations  on  Cat.  1.  He  breaks  off  again  (many  folios  later)  in  his 
exposition  of  the  second  verse  —  for  the  lecture  that  had  opened  with  a  somber 
reference  to  the  death  of  Leo  X  was  interrupted  by  a  group  of  boys  about  to 
burst  into  the  lecture  room  throwing  snowballs. 

Nunc  vero  domini  mei  videtis  petulantium  adolescentium  manum,  qui 
lapsae  nivis  occasione  nacta,  Como  sacra  facturi  corticibus  horrenda  ca- 
vatis  ora  induxere.  Satius  itaque  nobis  fuerit,  priusquam  illi  hue  irrum- 
pant  vosque  omnes  nive  conspargant  hodiernae  praelectioni  fmem  facere. 
(Fol.  35v) 

The  lectures  continued  into  the  spring.  Attendance  varied.  Valerianus  seems 
to  have  had  an  excellent  house,  for  example,  the  day  he  discussed  Cat.  2  and 
refuted  Poliziano's  interpretation  of  the  sparrow.  He  breaks  off  again  for  the 
summer  after  the  lecture  on  Cat.  14  and  resumes  some  months  later  — pre- 
sumably in  the  autumn  of  1522.  By  this  time,  of  course,  Adrian  had  arrived. 
He  came  in  August,  only  to  fmd  Rome  in  the  grip  of  the  terrible  pestilence 
that  his  detractors,  including  Valerianus,  were  to  dub  the  pestis  Hadrianea  (or, 
as  Valerianus  puts  it  in  De  litteratorum  infelicitate:  "pestilentia  ilia  .  .  .  quae  cum 
Adriano  Sexto  advecta  Romam  invasit").^ 

We  are  now  at  Lecture  22  and  ready  for  Cat.  15,  the  first  obscene  poem 
in  the  collection.  Valerianus  begins: 

Decreveram  anno  superiore  iuvenes  et  adolescentes  honestissimi  Catul- 
lum  ita  vobis  praelegere,  ut  ea  dissimularem  quae  propter  impudicam 
argumentorum  licentiam  indigna  videbantur,  quae  ex  hoc  loco  expon- 
erentur.  Atque  eo  tunc  consilio,  quum  in  haec  epigrammata  incidissem 
quae  sine  turpitudine  enuntiari  minime  poterant,  domesticis  negotiis  in 
patriam  avocatus,  quum  aestas  omnino  iam  appeteret,  haud  gravate  fmem 
feceram,  lectionem  aliam  primo  quoque  tempore  auspicaturus.  (fol  194). 

He  had  planned,  so  he  claims,  to  substitute  Horace's  Epistles  on  his  return, 
recognizing  that 

.  .  .  nihil  ad  bonos  mores  aptius,  nihil  ad  vitam  hanc  aulicam  cum  dig- 
nitate  degendam  utilius,  nihil  ad  temperatam  quandam  recte  beateque 
vitae  rationem  adcommodatius  [esse].  .  .  .  (fol.  194v) 

He  recounts  the  students'  protests  —  that  they  were  being  cheated,  that  they 


52  CATULLAN   LECTURES  OF   PIERIUS  VALERIANUS 

had  seen  Catullus  in  their  dreams  complaining  because  Valerianus  wanted  to 
emasculate  (castrare)  his  poems,  that  Valerianus  wanted  to  avoid  the  obscene 
poems  because  he  didn't  understand  them.  Worse  yet,  "Alii  recidisse  nos  ite- 
rum  in  Gottica  et  Vandalica  tempora  lamentantur,  quod  videatur,  veluti  sta- 
tuis  omnibus  illi  virilia  decutiebant  nunc  quoque  e  libris,  siquid  pruriat,  tolli" 
(fol.  194v).  The  language  here  is  reminiscent  of  that  of  Valerianus'  attack  on 
Adrian  in  De  litteratorum  infelicitate  eight  years  later  "...  [Hadrianus]  ad  Dei 
beneficio  altero  Imperii  anno  decessit,  qui  si  aliquanto  diutius  vixisset  Gottica 
ilia  tempora  adversus  bonas  litteras  videbatur  susciturus."^ 

Unfortunately,  it  is  not  clear  whether  Valerianus  was  going  to  go  ahead  with 
his  discussion  of  Cat.  15  and  its  equally  obscene  neighbor,  Cat.  16,  for  the 
next  page  is  blank  and  the  text  resumes  some  fifteen  folios  later  with  Cat.  17. 
Valerianus  continues,  omitting  21  (which  is  obscene),  and  breaking  off  again 
in  the  middle  of  his  lecture  on  Cat.  22.  At  the  bottom  of  the  page  is  the  note: 
"Reliquum  in  direptione  Romae  desideratum"  (Vat.  lat.  5215,  fol.  249v). 

Thus  it  seems  that  censorship  and  a  looting  army  have  deprived  us  of  the 
rest  of  Valerianus'  thoughts  on  Catullus,  and  we  can  see  the  fate  of  the  lectures 
as  a  demonstration  of  Valerianus'  later  claim  that  the  Sack  of  Rome  and  the 
reign  of  Adrian  VI  were  equally  detrimental  to  literature. ^° 

Bryn  Mawr  College 


Notes 


1.  Valerianus'  lectures  have  never  been  studied.  All  quotations  from  Vat.  lat.  5215 
are  cited  by  folio  in  text.  For  an  overview  of  the  contents  of  Vat.  lat.  5215,  see  L. 
Alpago-Novello,  "Spigolature  vaticane  di  argomento  bellunese.  I.  Un'  opera  inedita  ed 
ignorata  di  Pierio  ValerianOj'MrcAiyw  Venuto  Tridentino  9  (1926):  69-96.  It  is  clear  from 
his  errors  that  Alpago-Novello  did  not  read  the  lectures,  but  his  article  is  a  useful  start- 
ing point  and  contains  a  bibliography  of  Valerianus'  works.  For  the  biography  of  Va- 
lerianus see  especially  K.  Giehlow,  "Die  Hieroglyphenkunde  des  Yinxmonism.yi^,'"  Jahrbuch 
der  kunsthistorischen  Sammlungen  32  (1915):  113-129. 

2.  Otto  Skutsch,  "Metrical  Variations  and  Some  Textual  Problems  in  Catullus,"  Bul- 
letin of  the  Institute  of  Classical  Studies  of  the  University  of  London  16  (1969):  38-43. 

3.  Hieronymus  Avantius,  Emendationes  in  Catullum  et  in  Priapeias  (Venice,  1495). 

4.  For  Avantius  1495  see  note  3.  The  Emendationes  appeared  in  a  second  edition  with 
additions  and  changes  (Venice  1500).  The  commentary  of  Alexander  Guarinus,  though 
based  on  the  earlier  work  of  Baptista  Guarinus,  is  surprisingly  uninformative  about 
the  course  of  Catullan  scholarship.  Expositiones  in  Catullum  (Venice,  1521).  Guarinus' 
work  was  available  to  Valerianus:  it  contains  a  prefatory  letter  from  Leo  X  dated  June 
1521,  and  Valerianus  without  mentioning  his  name  refutes  Guarinus'  ideas  at  several 
points  in  his  lectures. 


JULIA  HAIG  GAISSER  53 

5.  For  Puccius' notes  see  F.  Calonghi,  "Margmalia."  Miscellanea  Pandiani  {Genoa,  1921): 
97-114;  B.  Richardson,  "Pucci,  Parrasio  and  Catullus,"  Italia  Medioevale  e  Umanistica 
9  (1976):  277-89;  J.  Butrica,  "Pontanus,  Puccius,  Pocchus,  Petreius,  and  Propertius," 
Res  publica  literarum  3  (1980):  5-9.  Parrhasius'  commentary  is  found  in  two  versions  in 
Naples,  Bibl.  Naz.  Ms.  13  B.  12  (fols.  2-4v);  the  first  version  covers  Cat.  1-Cat.  4.20-21, 
the  second  only  Cat.  1-Cat.  2.1.  For  Pontanus,  see  note  6. 

6.  The  evidence  for  Pontanus'  notes  is  contained  in  three  letters  to  Colottius.  Sum- 
montius  wrote  in  1509  and  again  in  1515,  and  Traiano  Calcia  in  1548.  1509:  G.  Pon- 
tano,  De  immanitate  (Naples,  1512)  verso  of  title  leaf;  1515:  E.  Percopo,  ed.,  Le  rime 
del  Chariteo  (Naples,  1897)  ccxcvi;  1548:  E.  Percopo,  Vita  di  Giovanni  Pontano  (Naples, 
1938)  294.  See  J.  H.  Gaisser,  "Catullus,"  in  Catalogus  Translationum  et  Commentariorum 
7  (forthcoming,  1988). 

7.  J.  H.  Gaisser,  "Catullus  and  his  First  Interpreters:  Antonius  Parthenius  and  An- 
gelo  Poliziano,"  Transactions  of  the  American  Philological  Association  112  (1982):  83-106. 

8.  The  plague  is  discussed  by  Adrian's  contemporary  biographer,  Paulus  lovius,  "Vita 
Hadriani  Sexti  Pont.  Max."  in  Elogia  virorum  bellica  virtute  illustrium  2  (Florence,  1551): 
135-37.  For  Valerianus' comments,  see  De  litteratorum  infelicitate  (Genewa,  1821)  13  and  17. 

9.  Valerianus  (note  8),  69-70. 

10.  Valerianus  (note  8),  69. 


The  Sullan  Declamations:  Vives'  Intentions 
Edward  V.  George 

Between  1519  and  1521,  Juan  Luis  Vives  published  a  series  of  works 
in  which  one  may  find  examples  of  both  the  theory  and  the  practice 
of  his  ideas  for  education  and  for  the  preservation  of  the  classical  tra- 
dition. The  set  of  pieces  from  which  my  paper  draws  its  focus,  the  Declama- 
tiones  Sullanae  (1520),  shows  some  of  his  principles  at  work.^  They  are  five 
suasoriae  of  the  kind  referred  to  by  Juvenal  (1.17)  and  Quintilian  (3.8.53),  ex- 
tant examples  of  which  are  quite  scarce  from  antiquity.  In  the  first  two  speeches, 
a  pair  of  contemporaries  of  the  dictator  Lucius  Cornelius  Sulla,  Fundanus  and 
Fonteius,  argue  respectively  for  and  against  Sulla's  retention  of  the  dictator- 
ship. In  the  third,  Sulla,  persuaded  by  Fonteius,  pubhcly  abdicates,  defending 
his  acts  while  in  office.  Marcus  Aemilius  Lepidus,  a  confirmed  anti-SuUan, 
dehvers  the  fourth  speech  at  his  accession  to  the  consulship,  mincing  no  words 
about  his  antagonist's  crimes  and  vowing  vengeance.  In  the  fifth  oration,  fol- 
lowing Sulla's  death,  the  same  Lepidus  deals  with  how  best  to  heal  the  de- 
vastation inflicted  by  the  dictator  on  the  Republic,  and  ends  with  legislative 
proposals  for  the  dismantling  of  key  Sullan  reforms. 

It  is  understandable  that  the  Sullan  Declamations  have  drawn  little  critical  at- 
tention; they  are  bulky  (138  Majansius  pages),  and  no  one  is  liable  on  their 
basis  to  class  Vives  with  Erasmus  as  a  literary  creator.  Yet  a  reading,  as  I  hope 
to  show,  will  repay  the  effort.  If  Erasmus  and  More  themselves  are  to  be  be- 
lieved, the  Declamationes  provided  evidence  of  an  extraordinary  talent  on  the 
rise.  Further,  there  is  something  to  be  learned  about  his  ideas  on  rhetoric.  Vives 
in  his  introduction  asserts  a  view  he  confirms  elsewhere;  declamation  is  not 
child's  play,  and  brings  to  full-grown  men  who  practice  it  rewards  directly  pro- 
portional to  the  degree  of  the  practitioners'  engagement  as  powerful  or  influen- 
tial flgures  in  public  affairs.  And  in  the  case  of  these  pairticular  pieces  he  asserts 
that  the  noble  dedicatee,  Charles  V's  younger  brother  Ferdinand,  will  find  val- 
uable political  lessons,  specifically  enumerated.  Vives  also  defends  in  passing 
the  propriety  of  declamation  in  school  training,  though  he  is  less  voluble  on 


56  THE   SULLAN   DECLAMATIONS 

this  matter  and  less  clear  as  to  exactly  what  level  he  feels  is  the  place  for  such 
training. 

When  first  published  in  1520  (Antwerp,  Hillen)  the  Declamationes  were  pre- 
ceded by  an  introductory  endorsement  by  Erasmus,  a  dedicatory  epistle  from 
Vives  to  Ferdinand  (319-21),  and  a  four-page  apologia  for  the  practice  of  de- 
clamation (321-27).  In  1538  the  Declamationes  reappeared  (Basel,  Winter)  along 
with  a  sixth  declamation  {Pro  noverca,  a  reply  to  one  of  pseudo-Quintilian's  law- 
court  speeches);  various  works  de praesenti  statu  Europae  et  bello  Turcico;  and  trans- 
lations oi i\i^  Areopagitica  and  the  Nicocles  of  Isocrates  — nearly  all  political  works. 
None  of  the  1520  introductory  material  to  the  Declamationes  listed  above  is  present 
in  the  Basel  1538  edition.  In  place  of  it  all  there  remains  a  different  dedicatory 
epistle  to  Ferdinand  (317-19),  which  though  it  appears  for  the  first  time  in 
1538  is  dated  "Louvain,  1520."  Winter  also  provides,  as  a  convenience  to  the 
reader  and  a  filler  for  otherwise  blank  pages,  the  attack  on  Sulla  by  Marcus 
Aemilius  Lepidus  from  the  fragments  of  Sallust's  Histories,  a  speech  acknow- 
ledged by  Vives  as  a  source  of  ideas  for  the  present  collection. 

In  both  the  1520  and  1538  versions  of  the  dedicatory  epistle,  Vives  tells  Fer- 
dinand, who  is  destined  to  a  life  of  high  political  responsibility,  that  originally 
the  Declamationes  were  to  have  no  dedicatee,  but  that  reports  of  the  royal  youth's 
serious  nature,  as  evidenced  inter  alia  by  his  fondness  for  Erasmus'  De  instit- 
utione  principis  Christiani,  altered  the  author's  intentions.  The  argumentum  of  his 
work  will  be  non  inutile  to  the  prince,  Vives  expects,  since  there  he  may  see: 
1 .  specimens  of  behavior  which  are  suitable  or  unsuitable  in  ruling  {quae  com- 
moda,  quae  incommoda  sint  in  principatu);  2.  how  permanent  and  universally  sat- 
isfying are  moderate  regimes;  3.  what  misery  it  is  to  rule  over  recalcitrant 
subjects;  4.  how  the  good  will  of  subjects  ameliorates  and  stabilizes  the  burden 
of  power;  5.  how  fear  may  keep  people's  faces  masked  and  their  remarks  sub- 
dued {metu  hominum  ora  comprimantur  et  sermones  coerceantur,  1520:  metu  hominum 
era  comprimantur  et  coerceantur  sermones,  1538),  but  when  it  relents  even  slightly, 
"free  voices  and  unfeigned  opinions  break  out  into  the  open";  6.  that  the  prince 
should  firmly  believe  that  his  interests  come  after  those  of  his  people. 

Vives  then  concludes  the  list  as  follows: 

Haec  aliaque  his  similia  permulta  quae,  longis  voluminibus  a  veteribus 
philosophis  summis  ingeniis,  magna  sapientia  disputata  atque  explicata, 
in  his  declamationibus  leges,  non  mihi  aliena  videntur  ab  ea  persona  et 
quam  iam  nunc  sustines,  et  quae  tibi  procedente  tempore  amplior  im- 
ponetur.  (1520) 

Haec  omnia  in  his  declamationibus  adumbrzintur;  et  quae  alibi  praecep- 
tis  traduntur,  hie  exemplis.  (1538) 

Thus  he  is  interested  in  the  contrast  between  regimes  founded  on  the  impo- 
sition of  fear  and  those  based  on  the  good  will  of  subjects.  He  notes  that  phi- 
losophers have  expounded  the  principles  listed  above  at  length;  the  implication 


EDWARD  V.   GEORGE  57 

is  that  their  exposition  in  the  Declamationes  will  be  briefer  by  comparison. 

We  can  proceed  with  profit  to  Vives'  fifth  assertion:  that  fear  exerted  by  a 
ruler  will  restrain  people's  reactions,  while  free  expression  will  erupt  if  the  fear 
is  lifted  even  a  little.  This  idea  touches  most  closely  the  dramatic  focus  of  the 
series.  Sulla,  having  terrorized  the  populace  for  two  years,  is  now  at  a  cross- 
roads. He  wishes  to  relinquish  his  power,  which  has  become  burdensome,  and 
the  question  is  whether  he  can  do  it  safely.  The  critical  consideration  is  the 
hostility  lurking  among  the  enemies  Sulla  has  made  by  his  savage  behavior. 
Fundanus  argues  that  Sulla  must  stay  in  the  saddle  to  maintain  a  check  on 
this  hostility,  while  Fonteius  holds  out  hope  that  it  czin  be  defused  only  by  the 
magnanimity  of  an  abdication,  in  the  absence  of  which  dire  consequences  will 
befall  his  children  at  the  end  of  his  life. 

Each  of  these  first  two  speakers  has  a  political  problem.  Both  are  well-disposed 
toward  Sulla,  since  the  fiction  is  that  they  have  been  invited  in  a  private  set- 
ting as  advisers  on  the  matter.  How  does  one  safely  remind  a  bloodthirsy  tyr- 
ant of  the  effects  of  his  most  hideous  enormities?  Fundanus  does  so  with  the 
utmost  care.  Four  fifths  of  his  speech  elapse  before  he  deals  with  the  matter 
head-on: 

.  .  .  quoniam  hie  inter  privatos  agimus  parietes,  nihil  oportet  dissimulari 
.  .  .  Quaeso  te  Luci  Sulla,  excidit  iam  tibi  quot  hominum  milia  iusseris 
ante  duos  annos  proscribi?.  .  .  Qui  a  te  liberisque  tuis,  ac  tota  domo,  nobis 
denique  omnibus  tuis,  unica  tui  magistratus  reverentia  comprimantur  et 
coerceantur,  ne  manus  nobis  violentas  afferant:  facturi,  simulac  nihil  supra 
civem  esses.  (345) 

Comprimantur  et  coerceantur  here  alludes  to  restraint  from  violence,  whereas  in 
the  quote  from  the  dedications  above  the  words  referred  merely  to  restraint 
of  citizens'  speech;  nevertheless,  it  is  striking  that  the  expression  recurs  just 
when  Fundanus  is  at  great  length  finally  arriving  at  the  crucial  matter  of  the 
moment  for  Sulla.  Once  Fundanus  has  uttered  the  unspeakable,  he  gives  rein 
to  a  grim  portrayal  of  what  is  in  store:  Sulla,  bound  and  helpless,  looking  on 
as  his  eviscerated  children  piteously  lift  their  pleading  eyes  to  him.  Even  here 
Sulla's  brutality  is  evoked  only  indirectly,  by  focusing  on  the  fury  with  which 
his  victims  will  exact  vengeance. 

Fonteius  is  even  more  circumspect.  He  dwells,  as  did  Fundanus,  on  the 
danger  that  there  are  unscrupulously  ambitious  aind  self-centered  Romans  who 
will  capitalize  on  any  advantage.  But  where  Fundanus  saw  them  as  poised  to 
strike  in  the  event  of  an  abdication,  Fonteius  finds  them  ready  to  await  the 
dictator's  death  and  to  follow  his  precedent  by  striving  for  lifetime  dictatorship 
themselves.  All  this  carries  us  away  from  the  idea  that  there  are  numerous  Ro- 
mans with  good  reasons  for  killing  Sulla  regardless  of  their  ambitions.  Fonte- 
ius adds  yet  another  argument  whose  focus  is  not  so  much  Sullan  vice  as  Roman 
virtue.  The  myth  that  power  is  enjoyable,  he  insists  against  Fundanus,  is  to- 


58  THE  SULLAN   DECLAMATIONS 

tailly  false,  and  never  more  so  than  in  the  case  of  one  in  power  over  the  Ro- 
mans; for  they  love  freedom  and  will  naturally  make  things  difficult  for  a  ruler 
who  does  not  command  their  good  will  (356).  The  sort  of  people  they  revered 
as  models  were  the  dictators  of  old  who  would  practically  race  to  see  how  quickly 
they  could  complete  the  job  for  which  they  were  appointed  and  lay  down  the 
supreme  office.  Thus,  what  Sulla  needs  to  worry  about  is  not  the  effect  of  his 
own  crimes,  but  the  excessive  civic  virtue  of  the  Romans.  Retention,  not  re- 
lease, of  the  dictatorship  will  put  Sulla's  people  at  risk:  but  Fonteius  draws  the 
listener  less  to  the  grim  consequences  of  the  wrong  choice  and  more  to  the  happy 
corollary  of  the  right  one  — an  old  age  of  glory  and  esteem  for  Sulla,  who  may 
even  turn  the  contempt  of  the  populace  to  his  advantage;  for  what  citizen  could 
fail  to  honor  the  memory  of  the  man  who  voluntarily  accepted  public  humil- 
iation for  the  good  of  his  country?  Fonteius  never  comes  any  closer  than  this 
to  acknowledging  that  what  makes  Sulla's  choice  a  hard  one  is  the  presence 
of  masses  of  victims  of  monstrous  crimes. 

In  his  abdication  speech,  Sulla  is  far  less  bashful  about  his  deeds  than  either 
Fundanus  or  Fonteius,  for  he  is  not  under  the  cloud  of  fear  to  which  Vives 
refers  in  his  dedicatory  litany  of  lessons  to  be  learned.  Sulla's  address  may  be 
seen  as  a  rendering  of  accounts  by  a  magistrate  at  the  close  of  his  term.  He 
takes  the  offensive,  insisting  that  his  harshness  saved  the  state,  that  the  people 
pleaded  for  his  intervention,  and  that  the  harvest  of  hate  he  reaped  was  un- 
justified. Vives  imbeds  moments  of  SuUan  cold-bloodedness,  as  when  the  dic- 
tator appeals  to  the  custom  of  decimation  to  confirm  the  wisdom  of  his 
executions  (368-9)  and  uses  euphemisms,  such  as  recuperavimus  patriam  (375) 
to  describe  his  murderous  return  to  Rome  in  82  B.C.  His  reply  to  the  charge 
of  unmerited  slaughter  is  especially  chilling: 

Boni,  inquis,  fuere  aliqui  ex  iis  qui  desiderantur;  non  negarim,  et  illos 
mediusfidius  interiise  dolet;  utinam  fieri  potuisset  (potuisse  Majansius per- 
peram)  ut  essent  a  malis  segregati  .  .  .  proinde  ut  tanta  mali  vis  exstir- 
paretur,  necesse  fuit  paucos  aliquot  bonos  tolli.  (376) 

It  is  thus  left  for  Sulla  himself  to  acknowledge  that  the  proscriptions  destroyed 
innocent  victims.  The  dictator  disdains  circumspection,  showing  up  the  ti- 
midity of  his  counselors. 

Against  these  three  speeches  as  backdrop,  we  finally  come  to  the  lurid  blunt- 
ness  of  Lepidus'  first  oration.  Sulla  has  now  made  his  choice,  and  Lepidus' 
task  is  to  galvanize  the  Romans  into  exacting  a  fit  penalty  from  the  newly  vul- 
nerable ex-despot.  For  the  first  time  in  the  series,  the  gory  facts  are  presented 
unvarnished.  In  Lepidus'  portrayal  Sulla  is  a  monstrous  butcher  who  has  sanc- 
timoniously passed  laws  while  behaving  as  Rome's  greatest  lawbreaker,  who 
used  to  dine  happily  in  the  company  of  his  victims'  severed  heads,  who  slaught- 
ered battalions  after  guaranteeing  surrender  terms.  Meanwhile  the  Romans, 
hitherto  coward  and  slaves,  now  have  a  golden  opportunity  to  redeem  them- 


EDWARD  V.   GEORGE  59 

selves  if  only  they  will  follow  Lepidus'  aggressive  lead.  He  promises  to  tear 
down  Sulla's  statues,  persecute  his  family,  and  see  to  his  fitting  punishment. 
The  peroration  is  remarkably  vacant  of  specifics,  a  fact  which  can  be  taken 
as  evidence  that  Lepidus  is  venting  rage  and  not  completely  in  command  of 
his  faculties  of  analysis  and  planning.  The  conclusion  is  thus  a  fitting  one  for 
his  wildly  violent  diatribe. 

The  fifth  and  last  oration  presents  a  great  deal  of  the  restrained  and  prac- 
tical advice  that  we  miss  in  the  fourth.  Lepidus'  approach  to  the  situation  after 
Sulla's  death  is  as  to  the  wreckage  of  a  calm  following  a  storm.  This  is  re- 
markable, because  one  might  have  reason  to  expect  Lepidus  to  wait  until  Sulla 
is  safely  dead  before  unleashing  the  furious  onslaught  we  find  in  the  fourth 
declamation,  and  to  opt  at  that  earlier  moment  for  a  cunning  exposition  de- 
signed to  lay  the  groundwork  for  the  eventual  dissolving  of  Sulla's  arrange- 
ments. Perhaps  the  reason  is  that  Vives  is  providing  an  illustration  of  what 
threatens  to  happen  all  at  once  when  a  reign  based  on  fear  comes  to  an  end. 
By  contrast,  when  we  see  Lepidus  after  Sulla's  death,  he  no  longer  feels  pressed 
to  excoriate  the  dictator.  He  does  not  let  loose  an  emotional  explosion  of  re- 
joicing or  vituperation;  rather,  he  is  now  looking  ahead  to  the  business  at  hand. 
He  surveys  Sulla's  acta  and  the  doubts  which  Sulla's  own  lawlessness  cast  on 
the  genuineness  of  his  intentions  in  instituting  the  reforms.  The  most  vivid 
evidence  for  the  altered  tone  of  the  fifth  speech  is  the  language  of  the  begin- 
ning, where  all  attention  is  soberly  focused  on  setting  about  to  restore  the  Re- 
public, and  of  the  end,  which  is  a  businesslike  and  unemotional  resolution 
couched  in  legal  language  reminiscent  of  the  conclusions  of  several  of  Cicero's 
Philippics  (3,  5,  8,  9,  10,  13,  14). 

Vives,  then,  does  indeed  pay  attention,  to  the  lessons  he  promised  Ferdi- 
nand he  would  present,  and  the  speeches  do  echo  his  introductory  comment 
about  fear  versus  the  will  of  the  people  as  a  basis  for  rule.  Further,  there  is 
some  subtlety  of  characterization  and  a  degree  of  surprise  in  where  Vives  pla- 
ces the  judicious,  tempered  speech  of  Lepidus  and  where  we  find  the  unin- 
hibited attack  on  Sulla  by  the  same  man. 

The  terms  in  which  Vives  insists  that  declamation  is  not  an  exercise  for  pueri 
or  for  early  education  confirm  the  overall  presentation  of  the  speeches  them- 
selves as  matter  for  consideration  by  grown  men.  In  the  1520  apologia,  Vives 
addresses  certain  enemies  qui  hoc  totum  declamandi  studium  sic  intra  grammaticos 
fines  detrudunt  utpuerorum  tantum  existiment  esse  .  .  .  (322).  Such  people's  true  prob- 
lem is  that  their  own  Latin  is  disgraceful,  and  they  thus  find  it  easier  to  pre- 
tend contempt  for  rhetorical  competence  in  others  than  to  admit  their  own 
deficiencies. 

Quo  fit  ut  de  nulla  re  queas  paulo  cultius  atque  elegantius  disserere  .  .  . , 
quin  mox  ea  omnia  unica  sententia  grammaticam  esse  pronuntient  .  .  . , 
quod  forsitan  licet  imprudentes  non  tamen  omnino  falso  dicunt;  etenim 


60  THE  SULLAN   DECLAMATIONS 

sunt  haec  grammatica,  id  est  litterata,  quae  vero  ipsi  faciunt  nihil  sunt 
minus  quam  grammatica.  (ibid.) 

The  complaint  echoes  one  which  Vives  published  at  about  the  same  time,  and 
may  have  written  somewhat  earlier,  while  defending  the  continuous  narrative 
style  of  commentary  which  he  offers  on  Cicero's  Dream  of  Scipio: 

nostri  enim  recentes  philosophi  nullum  scriptorem  enarrare  ilia  ratione 
commentarii  potes,  etiam  si  ex  intima  philosophia  de  reconditissimis  dis- 
putes rebus,  quin  opus  tuum  inauditum,  incognitum,  grammaticum  pro- 
nuntient,  et  tamquam  rem  vilem  nimis  abiectamque  contemnant  atque 
aspernantur.  .  .  .  (Majansius,  5:  104) 

Vives  insists  that  declamation  is  not  to  be  categorized  as  mere  "grammar"  study, 
both  because  Cicero  himself  and  other  sensible  Romans  pursued  the  practice 
well  on  into  adulthood,  and  because  declamation  ultimately  bears  upon  the 
acquisition  and  honing  of  skills  that  are  critical  to  the  highest  affairs  in  com- 
munity life: 

An  censent  grammaticorum  esse,  atque  eorundem  si  diis  placet  puero- 
rum  invenire  argumenta  ilia  et  rationes,  quibus  res  civiles  tractes,  quae 
ex  media  vita,  magnoque  rerum  usu,  et  totius  antiquitatis  cognitione  pe- 
tenda  et  eruenda  sunt?  (323) 

Ancient  philosophers  were  the  superior  of  their  sixteenth  century  counterparts 
because  they  cultivated  praeteritorum  temporum  cognitionem,  praecepta  dicendi,  artemque 
illam  civilem  (324).  Declamation  is  found  where  philosophical  wisdom  is  linked 
with  the  ability  to  use  this  wisdom  in  community  affairs,  and  so  defies  con- 
finement to  school  children's  exercises. 

The  Declamationes  Sullanae  represent  a  fusion  of  the  Isocratean  notion  of  a 
rhetorical  set-piece  designed  to  explore  substantial  political  ideas  with  the  tra- 
ditional suasoria,  a  speech  fabricated  from  the  stuff  of  a  temporally  distant  event, 
whose  primary  use  was  to  sharpen  technical  skill.  The  inventiveness  of  the  De- 
clamationes lies  in  this  fusion,  along  with  the  crowning  touch  of  faithfulness  to 
historical  sources;  the  combination  impressed  his  contemporaries,  and  can  at 
times  still  give  life  to  his  portrayals  for  the  modern  reader.'^ 

Texas  Tech  University 


Notes 


1 .  Citations  of  the  Declamationes  Sullanae  are  from  loannis  Ludovici  Vivis  Opera  Omnia, 
ed.  G.  Majansius  (Valencia:  Montfort,  1782  ff.;  repr.  London:  Gregg,  1964),  vol.  2, 


EDWARD  V.   GEORGE 


6i 


by  page  number.  I  also  use  loannis  Lodovici  Vivis  Valentini  declamationes  Syllanae  quinque 
(Antwerp:  Hillen,  1520),  2ind  loannis  Lodovici  Vivis  Valentini  Declamationes  Sex,  etc.  (Basel: 
Winter,  1538). 

2.  Characteristic  brief  treatments  are  Carlos  Norefia,  yuan  Luis  Vives  (The  Hague: 
Nijhoff,  1970),  pp.  64-66,  and  Adolfo  Bonilla  y  San  Martin,  Luis  Vives  y  la  filosofia 
del  Renacimiento  (Madrid:  Nueva  Biblioteca  Filosofica,  1929),  1:105,  and  2:172-74. 

3.  Erasmus:  Epistle  No.  1082  (ed.  Allen).  More:  Allen  No.  1106,  lines  21  ff. 

4.  Funds  from  the  National  Endowment  for  the  Humanities  and  Texas  Tech  Uni- 
versity have  supported  the  project  of  which  this  paper  is  a  part.  Several  Texas  Tech 
graduate  students,  particularly  Josephine  D.  Jardine  and  Anna  L.  E.  Hinkle,  provided 
valuable  help  in  work  on  the  Declamationes. 


Marc-Antoine  de  Muret:  A  Re-Evaluation 
Ellen  S.  Ginsberg 

Marcus  Antonius  Muretus,  French  humanist  of  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, was  born  April  12,  1526  and  died  June  4,  1585.  He  en- 
joyed a  tremendous  reputation  in  his  time  as  humanist,  philol- 
ogist, orator,  and  teacher.  He  had  personal  or  epistolary  relationships  with 
the  leading  scholars  and  men  of  letters  of  the  day,  such  as  George  Buchanan, 
Paulus  Manutius,  Justus  Lipsius,  J.-C.  and  J. -J.  Scaliger,  Cujas,  Lambin, 
Turnebe,  Ronsard  and  Montaigne.  He  served  the  kings  of  France,  cardinals 
of  the  house  of  Este,  and  several  popes,  while  teaching  in  France  and  Italy. 
He  published  commentaries,  editions,  translations  of  Latin  and  Greek  authors, 
letters,  orations  (chiefly  inaugural  lectures  for  his  courses),  poetry  (both  sa- 
cred and  profane),  and  the  first  known  secular  Neo-Latin  tragedy,  a  Julius 
Caesar  play.  From  the  lofty  stature  he  enjoyed  during  his  lifetime,  he  later 
plummeted  to  obscurity,  an  obscurity  from  which  he  is  only  now  being  rescued. 

The  only  monograph  devoted  to  Muret  was  published  in  1881  by  Charles 
Dejob.^  He  passes  lightly  over  Muret's  early  life  and  teaching  career  in  France 
to  concentrate  on  the  thirty  years  spent  in  Italy.  He  singles  out  for  attention 
the  last  twenty  years  of  Muret's  life  as  professor  of  moral  philosophy,  juris- 
prudence, and  rhetoric  at  the  University  of  Rome  and  as  the  official  orator 
of  the  French  kings  to  the  popes.  Dejob  is  interested  in  Muret's  career  as  a 
teacher,  including  his  pedagogical  program  and  methods,  but  he  neglects  Mu- 
ret's earlier  career,  his  "original"  writings  and  his  scholarly  publications.  De- 
job's  concentration  on  one  dimension  of  the  humanist  is  useful,  but  this  was 
not  a  one-dimensional  man. 

Recently  attention  has  been  focussed  on  Muret's  activities  and  influence  in 
France.  Roger  Trinquet  has  analyzed  in  detail  Muret's  early  career, 
1544-1553.^  Trinquet's  article  proposes  a  more  likely  timetable  and  sequence 
of  teaching  jobs  for  Muret  in  Poitiers,  Bordeaux,  Auch,  and  Paris  than  Dejob 
had  offered.  In  so  doing,  Trinquet  also  deals  with  the  thorny  question  of  the 
date  of  composition  and  first  publication  of  Muret'syu/iW  Caesar,  a  play  in  which 


64  MARC-ANTOINE   DE   MURET 

Montaigne  claims  to  have  played  a  leading  role  while  Muret  was  his  "precep- 
teur  domestique"  at  the  College  de  Guyenne.^  Trinquet  suggests  that  the  play 
was  written  in  Bordeaux  in  1547,  performed  that  same  year  and  published  in 
1549.  Trinquet's  documentation  and  conclusions  are  convincing  and  have  been 
accepted  by  recent  scholars. 

Muret's  relationship  to  the  young  Pleiade  poets  has  been  studied  in  detail 
from  several  different  points  of  view,  as  a  result  of  the  revival  of  interest  in 
the  French  Renaissance  at  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  century.  Scholars 
have  analyzed  Muret's  relationship  with  Ronsard  and  others  of  the  literary 
avant-garde,  such  as  Du  Bellay,  Baif,  Belleau,  Jodelle,  and  Grevin,  and  tried 
to  determine  his  influence  on  them."^  His  teaching  in  Paris,  his  early  human- 
ist editions  and  commentaries,  and  his  Juvenilia  have  been  studied  in  this  light. 
The  liminary  poems  Muret  wrote  for  his  friends  and  they  for  him  have  been 
scrutinized  for  what  they  reveal  about  their  relationships.  Muret's  member- 
ship in  the  "Brigade,"  the  effect  of  his  teaching  and  his  early  publications,  and 
his  obvious  sympathy  for  the  theories  of  the  new  poetic  school  have  been  well- 
documented  and  entitle  him  to  be  considered  a  major  formative  influence  on 
French  vernacular  poetry  in  the  1550's.  This  is  a  position  of  distinction,  for 
the  Pleiade  is  one  of  the  fmest  flowerings  of  poetry  in  France. 

Muret's  Commentary  on  Pierre  de  Ronsard's  Amours  of  1553  adds  another 
link  to  their  relationship.  The  commentary  was  published  in  1910  by  Hugues 
Vaganay,  with  an  introduction  to  Muret's  commentary  by  Joseph  Vianey.^ 
Recently  scholars  have  been  concerned  with  this  commentary  as  a  humanist 
document  in  the  vernacular  on  a  contemporary  French  poet,  related  to  Mu- 
ret's Latin  commentaries  on  classical  texts  in  method  and  intention.  Jean  Ceard 
and  I  have  recently  given  papers  on  this  point. ^  The  commentary  is  also  of 
interest  for  what  it  reveals  about  Ronsard,  who  may  have  revised  Muret's  text 
for  the  seven  editions  of  Ronsard's  complete  works  which  were  published  be- 
tween 1560  and  1587.  Isidore  Silver's  major  study  shows  that  all  revisions  of 
the  commentary  were  probably  made  by  Ronsard  rather  than  Muret,  who  left 
France  in  1554  and  returned  only  once,  1561-1563,  in  the  company  of  his  pa- 
tron. Cardinal  Ippolito  d'Este.''  The  continuing  interest  in  this  commentary 
is  revealed  by  a  critical  edition  which  is  being  published  at  the  end  of  this  year 
by  Gisele  Mathieu-Castellani  for  Droz.  This  will  be  the  first  time  Muret's  com- 
mentary is  published  by  and  for  itself  rather  than  as  appendage  to  Ronsard's 
poetry.  Thus,  this  one  text  can  be  assessed  from  two  perspectives,  as  pointing 
to  Ronsard,  and  as  pointing  to  Muret. 

Scholars  have  examined  Muret's  work  and  its  influence  on  the  French  theater 
of  the  sixteenth  century  through  his  Caesar,  which  appeared  with  the  Juvenilia 
in  1552.  Muret's  play  was  published  in  1886  by  G.  A.  O.  Collischonn  in  con- 
junction with  the  Cesar  (1561)  of  Jacques  Grevin  which  uses  Muret's  play  as 
its  chief  model. ^  Raymond  Lebegue  noted  a  relationship  between  Buchanan's 
Jephthes  (1554)  and  Muret's  Caesar.^  Recent  critical  editions  of  Grevin's  play 


ELLEN   S.    GINSBERG  65 

by  myself  and  Jeffrey  Foster  have  shown  the  relationship  between  the  three 
plays,  but  a  critical  edition  of  Muret's  Neo-Latin  play  is  still  lacking. ^^  It 
would  offer  scholars  a  further  opportunity  to  study  the  development  of  French 
theater  through  its  Neo-Latin  and  classical  roots. 

Modern  scholarship,  working  on  the  earlier  materials  discovered  by  Dejob 
and  others,  has  attempted  to  interpret  Muret's  life  and  works  in  terms  of  the 
history  of  ideas,  especially  the  history  of  rhetoric.  Morris  CroU  analyzed  Mu- 
ret's career  in  Rome,  his  inaugural  lectures  and  other  speeches,  and  the  sub- 
jects of  his  courses  in  terms  of  the  history  of  prose  style.  ^^  He  fmds  in  Muret 
the  leader  of  the  Anti-Ciceronian  movement  during  the  height  of  the  Counter- 
Reformation  in  Rome.  CroU  notes  Muret's  gradual  turning  away  from  the 
teaching  and  exclusive  use  of  Cicero  and  his  turning  toward  Seneca,  Tacitus, 
Juvenal,  Aristotle's  Nicomachean  Ethics  and  Rhetoric,  Plato's  Republic,  and  Roman 
law.  He  interprets  this  evolution  as  a  conscious  realization  that  the  Empire 
period  of  Roman  history  (the  Silver  Age)  was  closer  to  the  sixteenth  century 
in  its  politics  and  its  ideology  than  the  earlier  Republican  period.  Imitation 
of  Silver  Age  literature  introduced  more  freedom  and  variety  into  sixteenth- 
century  literature,  in  content  as  well  as  form.  Muret  might  thus  be  called  a 
neo-Ciceronian  or  a  post-Ciceronian  since  he  did  not  condemn  the  use  of  Cic- 
ero as  a  model,  but  rather  wished  to  combine  Cicero  with  later  models  whose 
Latinity  was  generally  condemned  by  the  Ciceronians.  Muret,  then,  accord- 
ing to  CroU,  played  a  pivotad  role  in  the  history  of  rhetoric  and  style. 

Marc  Fumaroli  in  his  distinguished  study,  L'dge  de  ['eloquence  (1980),  builds 
on  Dejob's  research  and  CroU's  interpretation  of  Dejob's  monograph  to  attach 
Muret's  teaching  and  influence  to  the  pedagogy  of  the  Jesuit  College  in  Rome 
and  elsewhere.'^  He  links  Muret's  teaching  and  theories  to  a  new  sixteenth- 
century  interest  in  Longinus  and  the  sublime.  Fumaroli  claims  that  Muret  is 
among  the  first  to  reconcUe  profane  and  sacred  erudition,  forging  a  link  be- 
tween humanism  and  Roman  orthodoxy  through  rhetoric.  According  to  Fum- 
aroli, Muret  and,  after  him,  Justus  Lipsius,  foUowing  their  decisive  meeting 
in  Rome  in  1567,  recognized  the  necessity  of  creating  an  art  of  written  prose 
comparable  to  the  oral  prose  of  ecclesiastical  eloquence  and  suited  to  Counter- 
Reformation  taste.  Fumaroli's  far-ranging  study  adds  another  exciting  dimen- 
sion to  Muret's  career  and  ideas  as  a  deliberate  link  between  cultural  mo- 
dels. 

Both  CroU  and  Fumaroli  see  in  Muret  a  if  not  the  major  figure  in  the  history 
of  post-tridentine  humanist  eloquence,  who  succeeded  in  zdlying  a  Christian 
content  to  a  pagan  style.  In  both  their  works,  however,  Muret  is  only  one  figure 
in  a  broader  canvas.  WhUe  CroU  is  principaiUy  concerned  with  the  develop- 
ment of  English  prose  style  in  the  seventeenth  century,  Fumaroli  is  oriented 
toward  the  evolution  of  French  eloquence  in  the  same  period;  hence  they  ig- 
nore those  aspects  of  Muret's  work  and  activity  which  are  not  related  to  their 
interests  and  perspectives.  The  two  enriching  and  stimulating  contributions 


66  MARC-ANTOINE   DE   MURET 

raise  Muret  to  new  heights  of  cultural  importance,  but  they  only  lift  up  se- 
lected dimensions. 

These  studies  may  be  divided  into  major  categories  according  to  emphasis: 
literary  history,  biography,  and  history  of  ideas.  Thus  they  correspond  to  sev- 
eral of  the  major  tendencies  of  literary  study  as  applied  to  the  Renaissance. 
Yet  examination  of  the  studies  on  Muret  reveals  that  their  possibilities  have 
scarce  been  exhausted.  Much  remains  to  be  done. 

Dejob's  pioneering  study,  though  based  on  research  in  archives,  libraries, 
and  Muret's  printed  works,  needs  revision  and  updating.  Much  new  material 
has  been  brought  to  light,  such  as  Pierre  de  Nolhac's  catalogue  of  Muret's  books 
found  in  the  Jesuit  College,  Trinquet's  research  on  Muret's  French  years,  and 
many  unpublished  letters.  ^^  Dejob's  monograph,  appearing  at  the  beginning 
of  the  era  of  scientific  scholarship,  is  limited  in  its  emphasis  on  education  and 
fails  to  give  a  coherent  interpretation  of  Muret's  contribution  to  Renaissance 
thought. 

From  another  point  of  view,  still  within  the  domain  of  literary  history,  Mu- 
ret's career  and  its  relationship  to  his  contemporaries  need  further  exploration. 
Contexts  — historical,  political,  religious  and  literary  —  should  be  investigated. 
Sources  and  influences  need  to  be  examined  in  depth.  Muret  should  be  seen 
in  the  context  of  his  time:  as  a  late  sixteenth-century  humanist  in  relation  to 
the  social  and  cultural  history  of  his  day.  Who  Muret  was  can  only  be  ap- 
preciated by  seeing  him  as  a  Renaissance  man  in  a  Renaissance  setting. 

However,  Muret's  humanist  activities  as  teacher,  orator,  editor,  commen- 
tator, philologist,  poet,  dramatist,  secretary,  and  diplomat  should  be  studied 
from  a  diachronic  as  well  as  from  a  synchronic  perspective.  His  relationship 
to  classical  studies  and  Renaissance  thought,  to  Platonism  and  Aristotelian- 
ism,  to  Ramism,  needs  clarification.  His  use  of  typical  humanist  genres  — 
commentary,  public  lecture,  letter  — demands  work.  As  Croll  and  Fumaroli 
have  shown,  his  influence  on  future  developments  in  European  thought  is  worth 
analyzing,  but  other  perspectives  than  theirs  should  be  brought  to  bear.  The 
Jesuit  connection,  mentioned  by  Fumaroli,  should  be  studied.  The  Jesuits  dif- 
fused Muret's  works  in  Europe  and  printed  his  unpublished  manuscripts.  For 
two  and  one  half  centuries  Muret's  works  were  studied  in  Jesuit  schools  as 
though  he  were  a  classical  author.  He  was  long  regarded  as  a  classical  model 
for  modern  Latin  prose.  This  remarkable  role  cries  out  for  probing  and  as- 
sessment. 

Such  a  thorough  historical  investigation  would  form  the  basis  for  the  pre- 
paration of  critical  editions,  especially  of  works  like  the  Juvenilia,  including  the 
Julius  Caesar,  whose  influence  has  been  paramount.  A  critical  biography  of  his 
editions  and  original  works  would  be  of  great  help  in  assessing  his  influence. 
Too  often  scholars  have  dealt  with  only  one  aspect  of  his  oeuvre  without  seeking 
connections  with  the  rest.  Hence,  a  fragmented  story  is  presented  of  a  figure 
who  practiced  many  interconnected  disciplines. 


ELLEN   S.    GINSBERG  67 

Most  deficient  in  studies  of  Muret's  works  is  critical  evaluation  and  judge- 
ment, comprehensive  and  in-depth  evaluation.  The  scholarship  has  been  his- 
torical and  descriptive  instead  of  being  informed  by  judgment  and  values.  It 
takes  the  easy  route  of  gathering  information  rather  than  assuming  the  deli- 
cate task  of  judiciously  deciding  worth.  The  few  critical  evaluations  offered 
repeat  those  of  earlier  scholars  without  taking  account  of  new  theories  and  modes 
of  criticism  such  as  those  concerning  the  history  of  rhetoric  and  rhetorical  gen- 
res. Although  much  of  Muret's  work  is  not  imaginative  or  "original"  literature, 
it  may  be  evaluated  in  terms  of  its  adherence  to  the  forms  and  conventions 
of  typical  humanist  genres.  A  study  of  Muret's  intentions,  methodology,  au- 
dience, and  Latinity  would  be  illuminating.  M-urct^s  Juvenilia  would  benefit  from 
further  critical  analysis.  His  Hymnorum  sacrorum  (1576),  an  example  of  the 
newly-rediscovered  Catholic  interest  in  sacred  verse,  should  be  studied.  These 
examples  of  Neo-Latin  literature  may  prove  more  valuable  and  influential  than 
present  critical  assessments  assume. 

Muret  remains  a  neglected  figure  because  all  the  studies  done  on  him  are 
partiEil,  concentrating  on  one  aspect  of  his  career  and  on  one  part  of  his  work 
at  the  expense  of  the  rest.  Scholars  have  been  selective  according  to  their  own 
training  and  disciplines  and  careers  instead  of  confronting  the  interconnection 
of  the  disciplines  Muret  practiced  and  the  totality  of  his  career.  French  scho- 
lars, except  for  Fumaroli,  neglect  the  Italian  years  (half  of  his  lifetime  and  the 
most  productive  part!)  in  favor  of  his  earlier  French  career.  Those  who  have 
studied  the  Italian  years  tend  to  neglect  the  earlier  formative  French  years. 
Yet  one  should  not  divide  Muret's  career  and  works  in  two  parts.  They  form 
a  whole  and  each  part  must  be  studied  in  relation  to  the  other.  Muret  brought 
the  best  of  French  humanism  into  Italy.  He  introduced  French  methods,  com- 
bining rhetoric  with  moral  philosophy,  history  with  jurisprudence,  res  with  verba. 
Muret  is  the  quintessential  Franco-Italian  or  Italo-French  humanist  of  the  late 
sixteenth  century.  Muret's  links  to  two  different  cultural  contexts  should  not 
be  held  against  him  but  seen  as  a  positive  contribution  which  makes  him  an 
exemplary  transitional  figure  in  the  development  of  European  culture.  He  joins 
an  early  adherence  to  the  tenets  of  Ciceronianism  to  a  late  and  forceful  Post- 
Ciceronianism.  He  links  humanism  and  humanist  prose  to  the  vernacular  poe- 
try of  the  Pleiade  and  to  development  of  the  vernacular  languages  and  liter- 
atures. His  teaching  career,  inaugural  lectures,  editions,  and  commentaries 
form  a  breviary  of  the  work  of  the  typicad  sixteenth-century  humanist.  He  is 
a  considerable  figure  in  the  history  of  humanist  writing,  thought,  and  ped- 
agogy. His  activity  in  these  three  areas  marks  a  significant  stage  in  the  history 
of  humanism.  Muret  was  a  leader  in  the  shaping  of  Western  civilization. 

Muret  had  no  lasting  reputation  as  a  scholar.  He  produced  no  magnum  opus 
to  which  his  name  has  remained  attached.  Yet  he  still  interests  scholars  as  pro- 
fession2il  humanist  and  professor.  A  thorough,  detailed  examination  of  his  career 
and  writings,  taking  into  account  the  growing  range  of  available  textuad  and 


68  MARC-ANTOINE  DE   MURET 

documentary  materials,  using  the  full  panoply  of  critical  techniques,  and  ex- 
ercising fresh  judgement  is  in  order.  On  this  four  hundredth  anniversary  of 
Muret's  death,  I  invite  you  to  assist  in  the  task. 

The  Catholic  University  of  America 


Notes 


1.  Charles  Dejob,  Marc-Antoine  de  Muret:  Un  professeur  frangais  en  Italie  dans  la  seconde 
mottle  du  seizieme  siecle  (Paris:  E.  Thorin,  1881). 

2.  Roger  Trinquet,  "Recherches  chronologiques  sur  la  jeunesse  de  Marc-Antoine  de 
Muret,"  Bibliotheque  d'humanisme  et  renaissance  27  (1965):  273-83;  republished  in  the  Bul- 
letin de  la  Societe  des  amis  de  Montaigne,  4th  ser.  7  (1966):  3-17  under  the  title:  "Un  maitre 
de  Montaigne:  L'humaniste  limousin  Marc-Antoine  Muret:  Sa  carriere  pedagogique 
en  France  et  la  compositon  de  son  Julius  Caesar." 

3.  Michel  de  Montaigne,  Essais,  I,  26. 

4.  See  Paul  Laumonier,  Ronsard poke  lyrique  (Paris:  Hachette,  1909),  pp.  106-15  and 
passim;  Pierre  de  Nolhac,  Ronsard et  rhumanisme  (Paris:  H.  Champion,  1921),  pp.  92-101; 
Pierre  Champion,  Ronsard  et  son  temps  (Paris:  H.  Champion,  1925),  passim;  Henri  Cha- 
mard,  Histoire  de  la  Pleiade,  4  vols.  (Paris:  Didier,  1939-1940),  passim;  Mary  Mor- 
rison, "Ronsard  and  Catullus:  The  Influence  of  the  Teaching  of  Marc-Antoine  de  Muret," 
Bibliotheque  d'humanisme  et  renaissance  18  (1956):  240-74;  Isidore  Silver,  The  Intellectual 
Evolution  of  Ronsard,  vol.  1,  The  Formative  Influences  (St.  Louis:  Washington  University 
Press,  1969),  pp.  65-92  for  Ronsard.  See  also  the  following  monographs:  Henri  Cha- 
mard,  Joachim  du  Bellay,  1522-1560,  Travaux  et  Memoires  de  I'Universite  de  Lille, 
vol.  8,  Memoir  no.  24  (Lille:  Siege  de  I'Universite,  1900);  Mathieu  Auge-Chiquet, 
La  vie,  les  idees  et  I'oeuvre  de  Jean-Antoine  de  Baif  (Paris:  Hachette,  1909);  Alexandre  Eck- 
hardt,  Remy  Belleau,  sa  vie,  sa  "5^_^m^" (Budapest:  J.  Nemeth,  1917);  Enea  Balmas,  Un 
poeta  del  rinascimentofrancese:  Etienne Jodelle  (Florence:  Leo  S.  Olschki,  1962);  Lucien  Pin- 
vert, ya^^M^i  Grevin  (1538-1570):  Etude  biographique  et  litteraire  (Paris:  Fontemoing,  1898). 

5.  Preface  to  les  Amours  de  Pierre  de  Ronsard,  by  Joseph  Vianey  (Paris:  H.  Cham- 
pion, 1910),  pp.  i-xxxiii. 

6.  Jean  Ceard,  "Muret,  commentateur  des  Amours  de  Ronsard"  (Paper  delivered  at 
the  Colloque  International  Ronsard,  Duke  University,  Durham,  N.  C,  11-13  April 
1985);  my  paper,  "Muret's  Commentary  on  Ronsard's  Amours  of  1553,"  was  presented 
at  the  Eighth  International  Conference  on  Patristic,  Mediaeval  and  Renaissance  Stu- 
dies, Villanova  University,  Villanova,  PA,  September,  1983,  and  in  a  revised  version 
at  the  International  Federation  of  Modern  Languages  and  Literatures  Conference,  Bud- 
apest, Hungary,  August  1984.  It  is  being  published  by  the  Journal  of  Medieval  and  Re- 
naissance Studies. 

7.  Isidore  Silver,  "The  Commentaries  of  the  Amours  by  Muret  and  Belleau,"  in  Three 
Ronsard  Studies,  Etudes  de  philologie  et  d'histoire  35  (Geneva:  Droz,  1978),  pp.  109-67. 

8.  G.  A.  O.  Collischonn,yat^M^^  Grevin's  Tragodie  '"Caesar"  in  ihrem  Verhdltnis  zu  Muret, 
Voltaire  und  Shakespeare  (Marburg:  Elwert,  1886). 

9.  Raymond  Lebegue,  La  tragedie  religieuse  in  France:  Les  debuts  (1514-1573)  (Paris: 
H.  Champion,  1929),  pp.  245-47. 


ELLEN  S.    GINSBERG  69 


10.  Ellen  S.  Ginsberg,  Le  ''Cesar"  de  Jacques  Grevin  (Geneva:  Droz,  1971)  and  Jeffrey 
Foster,  "Cesar"  de  Jacques  Grevin  (Paris:  Nizet,  1974). 

11.  Morris  Croll,  "Muret  and  the  History  of  Attic  Prose',"  PMLA  39,  no.  2  (1924): 
254-309.  Reprinted  several  times  in  collections  of  C roll's  essays. 

12.  Marc  Fumaroli,  L'dge  de  I'eloquence  (Geneva:  Droz;  Paris:  H.  Champion,  1980). 

13.  Pierre  de  Nolhac,  "La  bibliotheque  d'un  humaniste  au  XVIe  siecle:  Les  livres 
annotes  par  Muret,"  Melanges  d'archeologie  et  d'histoire,  Ecole  Frangaise  de  Rome  3  (1883): 
202-38.  See  also  Pierre  de  Nolhac,  "Lettres  inedites  de  Muret,"  Melanges  Charles  Graux 
(Paris:  E.  Thorin,  1884),  pp.  381-403;  Ph.  Tamizey  de  Larroque,  "Notice  inedite  de 
Guillaume  Colletet  sur  Marc-Antoine  Muret,  suivie  d'une  lettre  de  Muret  egalement 
inedite,"  Revue  de  I'histoire  de  la  litterature  frangaise  3  (1896):  270-85. 


Horace's  Odes  in  the  Psalm 
Paraphrases  of  Buchanan 

Roger  Green 

One  of  the  most  attractive  features  of  George  Buchanan's  Psalm 
Paraphrases  is  the  variety  of  his  metres,  and  so  it  always  has  been, 
to  judge  from  the  regularity  with  which  printers  and  editors  ap- 
pend Plantin's  analysis  of  the  carminum  genera  to  the  poems.  Buchanan  does  not 
go  to  the  sometimes  bizarre  lengths  of  those  for  whom  variety  was  an  end  in 
itself,^  but  rather,  as  I  showed  in  a  previous  paper,  follows  in  the  footsteps 
of  classical  and  post-classical  lyric  poets,  especially  Horace,  Prudentius,  Au- 
sonius,  and  Boethius.^  Among  these  Horace  is  paramount.  The  immediate 
visual  impression  that  Buchanan's  paraphrase  is  closer  to  Horace  than  to  any 
other  ancient  poet  is  confirmed  by  the  observation  that  Buchanan  uses  15  of 
Horace's  20  metres,  11  of  Prudentius'  18,  9  of  the  20  found  in  Ausonius,  and 
less  than  a  quarter  of  Boethius'  metres.  It  is  true  that  Buchanan  derives  some 
of  his  commoner  metres  from  Prudentius,  and  not  Horace;^  and  also  that  the 
inclusion  of  the  hexameter  in  the  series  is  a  feature  which  can  be  compared 
with  its  appearance  among  the  metra  of  Boethius'  Consolatio  Philosophiae,  of  which 
Buchanan  was  certainly  aware.  But  unquestionably  it  is  not  Boethius'  prose- 
verse  medley  or  Prudentius'  oeuvre  —  which  has  been  seen  as  a  unified  and  de- 
liberate design  with  lyric  collections  surrounding  hexameter  poems'*  — that  is 
suggested  to  the  reader,  but  Horace's  Odes.  Indeed,  it  may  be  that  Buchanan 
and  his  printers  wished  to  reinforce  this  impression  when  they  divided  his  Psalms 
into  five  books,  an  arrangement  which  although  found  in  ancient  texts  is  not 
always  followed  in  sixteenth-century  editions:  the  intention  behind  this  may 
have  been  to  underline  an  analogy  with  Horace's  five  books  of  Odes  and  Epodes. 
Admittedly,  there  is  little  connection  in  content  or  expression  with  the  Epodes 
(this  is  hardly  surprising),  but  many  of  Buchanan's  metres  are  epodic  in  the 
broad  sense. 

In  designing  his  paraphrase  of  the  Psalms  as  a  collection  of  odes  on  Ho- 
ratian  lines,  Buchanan  is  diverging  from  the  usu2il  practice  of  his  time,  which 
was  to  employ  the  elegiac  metre  alone.  This  had  been  done  by  Bonade,  Hes- 


72  HORACE  AND  BUCHANAN 

sus,  and  Spangeburg  in  their  complete  collections,^  cind  by  Bourbon,  Micyl- 
lus  and  Melanchthon  among  others  for  particular  Psalms.  Two  convergent  in- 
fluences help  to  explain  the  new  departure.  In  1543,  at  a  time  when  Buchanan 
may  have  been  contemplating  if  not  composing  the  Paraphrases,  there  appeared 
the  Zurich  Bible,  a  new  Latin  version  which  must  have  made  a  strong  impact 
on  many  humanists.  (It  was  certainly  used  by  Buchanan,  perhaps  in  Steph- 
anus'  convenient  edition  of  1545  which  contained  in  two  small  volumes  the 
new  translations,  the  Vulgate,  and  copious  exegetical  notes.)  In  a  preface  to 
the  new  version,  the  Swiss  theologian  BuUinger  referred  to  the  Psalms  as  odcie, 
implying  an  analogy  with  Horace  that  went  back  at  least  to  the  time  of  Je- 
rome.^ It  is  true  that  Buchanan  keeps  the  term  ode  for  certain  of  his  'profane' 
poems  in  the  hendecasyllabic  metre  — a  metre  he  does  not  use  in  the  Psalms  — 
but  the  similarity  which  others  saw  between  the  Psalms  and  Horatian  odes  is 
unlikely  to  have  escaped  him. 

The  second  influence  to  be  mentioned  is  the  work  of  Jean  Salmon  Macrin, 
whose  religious  poems  appeared  in  a  number  of  small  collections  between  1530 
and  1540.  Macrin  did  not  apparently  envisage  writing  a  complete  set  of  Psalms, 
but  made  renderings  of  a  small  number  in  a  variety  of  metres.  Some  of  these 
in  the  edition  of  1538  are  termed  ode,  and  both  in  these  (which  are  Psalm  Pa- 
raphrases) and  in  other  religious  poems  we  find  the  Sapphic  and  Alcaic  metres 
typical  of  Horace.  Stephanus  might  decry  the  efforts  of  Macrin  as  uninspired 
when  introducing  to  the  world  his  selection  of  Buchanan's  work  in  1556,  but 
it  is  likely  that  Buchanan  found  in  them  much  to  interest  him;  more,  certainly, 
than  in  the  difficult  rhythms  of  Gagnay's  75  offerings  that  appeared  in  the  fol- 
lowing decade.^  Admittedly  Macrin  sometimes  took  an  unsubtle  approach  to 
the  Christianisation  of  Horace  — two  poems  in  the  1537  collection  begin  quo 
me  Christe  rapis  tui  /plenum  (cf.  Odes  3.25.1-2),  and  Christum  in  remotis  carmina 
rupibus  / vidi  docentem  (cf.  Odes  2.19  1-2)  — and  such  a  naive  technique  had  little 
appeal  to  Buchanan.  But  as  a  metrical  model  his  influence  may  have  been  de- 
cisive. It  is  less  probable  that  this  influence  came  by  an  indirect  route  through 
Musius,  with  whom  Buchanan  may  well  have  been  unacquainted,  and  the  same 
may  well  be  true  of  his  compatriot  Maclean,  later  bishop  of  the  Isles. ^ 

The  translator  of  the  Psalms  who  wished  to  follow  up  his  metrical  inspira- 
tion with  verbal  echoes  of  Horace  could  do  so,  broadly  speaking,  in  two  ways. 
He  could  either  "borrow"  phrases  from  the  classical  poet,  or  he  could  imitate 
the  style  and  the  tone  without  using  the  actual  words.  Buchanan  in  fact  does 
both,  but  resorts  to  the  latter  strategy  far  less  often.  A  quotation  from  Psalm 
49  will  show  that  he  was  capable  of  subtle  imitation  of  the  Horatian  style: 

Mors  aequa  stultis  et  sapientibus 
intentat  arcum:  par  manet  exitus 
vitae  hos  et  illos;  occupat  improbis 
ignotus  haeres  parta  laboribus. 


ROGER  GREEN 


73 


villae  superbae  delicias  breves, 
luxuque  structas  regifico  domos 
linquunt;  sepulchrique  irremeabilis 
tenebricosis  sub  latebris  iacent. 

quid  fama  duris  parta  laboribus 
prodest?  inanis  quid  tituli  decus? 
quid  aura  blandae  laudis,  et  ambitus 
nomen  futuris  prodere  saeculis? 

cum  vani  honoris  ver  breve  floruit 
letale  spirans  mortis  hiems,  viros 
et  bruta  raptans  interitu  pari, 
oblivionis  nube  pari  premit. 

(29-44) 

This  passage  is  rich  in  Horatian  themes,  but  they  are  not  treated  in  the  style 
of  a  pastiche:  Buchanan  has  assimilated  and  remodelled  traditional  material. 
Mors  aequa  strikes  not  by  rudely  kicking  in  the  door  (cf.  Odes  1.4. 13  pallida  Mors 
aequo pulsat pede  .  .  .),  but  with  carefully  aimed  arrows.  As  in  Scripture,  it  comes 
alike  to  wise  and  stupid,  and  the  familiar  polarity  of  wealth  and  poverty  is 
avoided.  In  the  treatment  of  the  heir,  Buchanan  certainly  makes  use  of  one 
of  the  numerous  passages  in  which  Horace  uses  arguments  of  this  kind  {Odes 
2.18.5-6  neque  Attali  /  ignotus  heres  regiam  occupavi),  but  does  so  in  his  own  way 
with  a  subtle  use  of  improbis  parta  laboribus:  the  meaning  of  the  adjective  is  close 
to  both  "dogged"  and  "greedy,"  and  one  might  compare  Vergil's  labor  improbus 
(G.  1.145-6)  and  Horace's  own  improbae  .  .  .  divitiae  {Odes  3.24.62-3). 

A  familiar  message  is  brought  home  in  the  second  stanza  with  a  series  of 
well-arranged  contrasts,  in  particular  between  the  stark  and  emphatic  verbs 
linquunt  and  iacent,  and  between  breves  and  irremeabilis,  while  the  emphatically 
placed  sepulchrique  takes  up  villae  and  domos,  and  tenebricosis  answers  the  epithets 
superbae  and  regifico.  These  impressive  and  expressive  adjectives  are  woven  into 
the  metre  in  a  manner  which  is  quintessentially  Horatian,  notwithstanding  their 
varied  provenance  {regifico  is  Vergilian,  tenebricosis  CatuUan);  so  too  the  noun 
oblivionis  (cf.  oblivioso  in  the  very  different  context  of  Odes  2.7.21).  Stanza  three 
of  our  passage  consists  of  three  bland  rhetorical  questions  which  are  very  much 
in  the  manner  of  Odes  2.16.17  ff.  and  other  passages,  though  less  colorful.  Fi- 
nally, the  lesson  to  be  learnt  from  the  passing  of  the  seasons  is  treated  boldly 
and  economically  with  two  contrasting  genitives:  vani  honoris  ver  breve  and  mor- 
tis hiems  ('the  winter  that  is  death'),  with  just  a  verbal  hint  of  Odes  4.7.10,  from 
which  interitura  may  be  echoed  in  interitu  here.^ 

This  illustrative  excerpt  from  Psalm  49  could  have  been  extended,  and  a 
few  other  examples  of  largely  independent  composition  in  the  Horatian  man- 
ner could  be  adduced  from  elsewhere:  for  example  the  "priamels"  of  4.30  ff., 
20.27  ff.,  and  25.1  ff.,  which  bear  a  general  resemblance  to  Odes  1.1  ff.,  1.7.1 


74  HORACE  AND   BUCHANAN 

ff. ,  and  3.1.9  ff.;  and  the  evocative  use  of  the  exotic  names  of  distant  races 
in  72.34  ff.^^  But  it  is  not  normal  for  Buchanan  to  emulate  his  predecessor 
consistently  in  this  way.  He  prefers  to  introduce  echoes  or  adaptations  at  var- 
ious points,  where  they  attract  immediate  attention  within  the  rather  prosaic 
and  inevitably  repetitive  diction  of  the  paraphrases.  These  passages  are  not 
as  frequent  as  might  be  expected  —  certainly  not  as  frequent  as  echoes  of  Ver- 
gil in  contemporary  pastoral  and  epic  —  and  although  he  sometimes  allows  him- 
self considerable  latitude  in  his  paraphrasing,  he  is  restrained  in  this  respect. 
It  is  clear  that  Buchanan  knows  all  four  books  of  the  Odes  well,  yet  only  about 
one  third  of  the  paraphrases  show  clear  echoes  or  imitations,  and  in  many  of 
these  fifty  or  so  poems  there  is  only  a  single  item  from  the  classical  poet.  As 
will  be  seen,  the  passages  are  used  with  care  and  discrimination.  Horace  is 
not  regarded  as  a  source  of  "purple  patches";  nor  is  he  used  as  a  quarry  for 
suitable  material.  One  of  the  manuscripts  shows  him  beginning  with  phrases 
from  Horace  and  subsequently  making  changes  to  them,  but  the  finished  pro- 
duct has  no  sign  of  Horatian  padding. '  ^  It  is  to  be  expected  that  certain  phra- 
ses would  insinuate  themselves  without  any  conscious  design;  perhaps  this  is 
inevitable,  but  in  remarkably  few  places  can  this  plausibly  be  suggested.  So 
Horace's  multa  petentibus  from  Odes  3.16.42  generates  busta  petentibus  and  oracla 
petentibus  in  a  similar  metre  at  28.4  and  99.24  respectively,  and  cedere  nescii  {Odes 
1 .6.6)  is  the  model  oifallere  nescii  (33. 14).  Here  the  attempt  to  seek  any  further 
significance  would  be  sterile.  In  the  great  majority  of  cases  Buchanan  chooses 
his  Horatian  material  carefully,  and  his  choices  follow  well-defined  lines. 

The  main  themes  of  Horatian  lyric  are  well  known.  There  is  a  qualified  hed- 
onism, often  based  on  the  gastronomic,  aromatic  and  erotic  pleasures  of  the 
symposium;  an  ethic  which  commends  moderation  and  adjustment  to  the 
broader  realities  of  life  and  death;  a  delight  in  the  Italian  countryside  and  a 
strong  awareness  of  the  processes  of  nature;  a  devotion  to  traditional  religion; 
and  a  sympathetic  respect  for  the  social  aims  and  military  achievements  of  Au- 
gustus. Some  of  these  themes  cannot  be  expected  to  appear  in  Buchanan  (though 
feasting  is  embraced  within  the  metaphorical  range  of  the  Psalms,  and  wine 
is  praised  once).  The  survey  that  follows  will  concentrate  upon  the  world  of 
nature,  ethics,  and  religion,  concluding  with  two  rather  more  surprising  areas, 
namely  the  similar  roles  of  God  and  Augustus  in  protecting  the  world,  and 
the  similar  poetic  personae  of  Buchanan's  Psalmist  and  Horace.  It  is  a  signi- 
ficant fact  that  most  of  the  passages  where  Buchanan  echoes  Horace  fall  neatly 
into  categories,  and  are  rarely  emptied  of  their  original  connotation.  Even  a 
phrase  like  quae  laborantes  {Odes  3.22.2),  which  might  be  considered  merely  as 
a  metrically  useful  phrase  for  the  Sapphic  stanza,  remains  in  a  context  of  prayer 
in  90.3.  There  are  very  few  exceptions  to  be  noted,  among  them  Horace's  dif- 
ficult oculo  irretorto  {Odes  2.2.23)  which  is  now  used  of  God's  unswerving  glance 
(33.59).  In  42.27  saxa  perambulem  occurs  in  a  description  of  exile,  though  for 
Horace,  when  he  wrote  tutus  bos  etenim  rura perambulat  {Odes  4.5. 17),  the  phrase 


ROGER   GREEN  75 

evoked  the  tranquility  of  the  local  countryside. 

The  natural  world  is  less  prominent  in  Buchanan  than  in  Horace;  this  is 
partly  because  of  the  Biblical  text,  but  it  is  notable  that  here  Buchanan  rarely 
departs  from  the  text,  as  he  does  elsewhere,  to  introduce  suitable  material.  Both 
writers  use  the  theme  in  an  essentially  metaphorical  way.  In  Odes  3. 16.29  purae 
rivus  aquae  is  one  of  the  blessings  that  make  the  poet  prefer  his  simple  lot  to 
that  of  the  famous  and  powerful;  in  Buchanan's  version  of  Psalm  23  it  is  part 
of  the  locus  amoenus  which  is  enjoyed  by  God's  flock,  and  so  a  feature  which 
is  well  suited  to  the  double  image  of  person  and  animal  sustained  throughout 
the  paraphrase.  Buchanan's  use  of  lympha  fugax  (Odes  2.3.12)  — not  only  an  in- 
centive to  a  party  but,  again,  a  symbol  of  moderate  pleasures  — is  a  remark- 
able one:  {civitatem)  algenti  pererrans  /  lympha  Jugax  hilarat  liquore  (46.15-6).  The 
phrase  is  used  to  render  a  somewhat  obscure  passage  (verse  4):  rivi  tamen  flu- 
minis  exhilarabunt  civitatem  dei  (Zurich),  a.nd  fluminis  impetus  laetiftcat  civitatem  dei 
(Vulgate).  The  stream  is  transferred  to  the  heavenly  city,  which  is  thus  seen 
at  least  in  part  as  a  locus  amoenus.  Moreover  it  creates  a  striking  and  eloquent 
contrast  to  the  elemental  forces  of  wind  and  wave  described  in  the  first  three 
stanzas;  the  sudden  appearance  of  a  delicate  stream  in  such  a  violent  context 
underlines  the  atmosphere  of  peace  and  enjoyment  within.  The  same  security 
is  connoted  in  a  very  different  way  in  Psalm  125,  this  time  with  a  notable 
change.  In  the  opening  lines  Sionis  arcem  non  aquilo  impotens  /  saxo  sedentem  per- 
petuo  quatit,  Buchanan  has  departed  from  the  Horatian  context  — his  own 
poetry  — but  the  common  point  of  permanence  remains.  Analogously  in  90.48 
with  ocius  Euro  from  Odes  2. 16.24  (describing  Cura),  he  retains  the  note  of  me- 
nace, stressing  the  anxiety  of  the  human  condition.  Finally,  he  twice  recalls 
the  phrase  catulos  leaenae,  and  follows  Horace  in  using  it  both  as  symbol  and 
simile.  In  Odes  3.20.2  the  whelps  stand  for  a  danger  of  a  different  kind,  and 
so  too  in  Buchanan's  91st  Psalm,  where  in  a  graphic  metaphor  of  divine  pro- 
tection they  combine  fittingly  with  the  other  animals  which  will  become  harm- 
less (40).  In  the  other  passage  he  develops  a  simile  of  his  own  based  on  Horace's 
lion  simile  from  Odes  4.4.13  ff. ,  focussing  not  on  the  carefree  deer  but  on  the 
stealthy  and  insidious  attacker. 

In  his  treatment  of  ethical  matters  Buchanan  is  obliged  to  tread  with  some 
caution.  There  is  no  problem  with  such  commonplace  moral  tags  as  integer  vitae 
and  scelerisque  purus,  of  which  the  former  is  used  once  (101.33)  and  the  latter 
twice  (51.41,  101.11),  with  a  further  adaptation  to  integer  iudex  scelerisque  vindex 
in  103.17.  Another  such  phrase  from  a  well  known  line  (iustum  et  tenacem  pro- 
positi virum,  Odes  3.3.1)  is  used  at  15.6  rectumque propositi  tenax;  there  is  no  sig- 
nificance in  the  slight  change,  which  is  the  result  of  Buchanan's  fondness  for 
abstract  expressions.  But  a  longer  passage  from  the  same  ode  does  undergo 
an  important  change.  Horace  had  continued  sifractus  illabatur  orbis,  impavidum 
ferient  ruinae,  but  Buchanan  writes  sifractus  illabatur  orbis,  incolumis fugiet  ruinam 
(125.7  f.).  First,  the  phrase  refers  not  to  the  just  and  steadfast  Stoic  depicted 


7b  HORACE  AND   BUCHANAN 

by  Horace,  or  to  a  modern  counterpart,  but  to  the  person  who  puts  his  hope 
in  God.  Secondly,  Horace  says  that  he  will  be  unafraid,  Buchanan  that  he  will 
escape.  For  Horace  the  point  — a  Stoic  point  — is  the  absence  of  fear,  for  Buch- 
anan it  is  freedom  from  danger. 

Two  more  passages  of  Horace  can  be  used  to  show  how  Buchanan  was  pre- 
pared to  use  Horace  in  his  own  way.  There  is  no  mistaking  the  Horatian  pe- 
digree oifelices  ter  et  amplius  {Odes  1.13.17),  but  whereas  Horace  had  used  it 
of  the  man  who  was  securely  in  love,  Buchanan  spiritualizes  the  notion  so  that 
it  refers  either  to  the  person  who  fears  God  (128.1)  or  to  the  person  who  puts 
his  hope  in  him  (84.15).  The  other  phrase  is  nihil  est  ab  omni  parte  beatum  {Odes 
2.16.27-8),  which  was  evidently  too  pessimistic  for  Buchanan.  In  16.6  God 
is  described  as  omni  ex  parte  beato;  in  17.63-4  the  Psalmist,  confident  in  God's 
readiness  to  reward  his  innocence,  declares  ilia  lux  verefaciet  me  ab  omni  /parte 
beatum.  Here  it  is  reasonable  to  speak  of  Buchanan  taking  issue  with  his  model 
and  "correcting"  it. 

Philosophical  notions  clearly  demanded  great  care.  It  is  at  first  sight  sur- 
prising that  Necessitas  {Odes  1.35.17,  3.1.14,  3.24.6)  is  present  at  all  in  Buch- 
anan, but  at  49.28  we  do  find  lege  durafixa  necessitas.  There  is  a  crucial  change: 
Horace's  Fate  has  become  the  necessity  imposed  on  man  by  the  law  of  God. 
(Buchanan  could  have  been  aware  of  the  reading  serva  at  Odes  1.35.17.)^^  From 
the  same  poem  the  phrase  iniurioso  ne pede proruas  (1.35.13)  is  now  applied  to 
a  mortal  enemy,  not  Fortune  (56.2).  The  mercilessness  of  death  has  been  already 
commented  upon,  and  it  is  not  surprising  to  find  Horace's  epithet  illacrimabilis 
in  49.61  and  89.102.  (Though  not  a  Christian  attitude,  such  a  gloomy  view 
of  death  was  part  of  the  Psalmist's  outlook.)  In  Psalm  19  {caeli  enarrant  gloriam 
dei)  Buchanan  goes  out  of  his  way  to  bring  in  a  Horatian  phrase,  with  inter- 
esting consequences.  He  addresses  the  poem  to  insanientis  gens  sapientiae  and  seems 
to  see  an  analogy  with  the  ode  in  which  Horace  declares  that  he  was  a  devotee 
of  insanientis  .  .  .  sapientiae  until  nearly  killed  by  a  tree  that  had  been  struck  by 
lightning.  Only  one  line  is  used  {Odes  1.34.2),  but  it  may  have  been  the  Ho- 
ratian pretence  of  recanting  his  belief  in  the  face  of  natural  phenomena  that 
inclined  him  to  this  approach.  He  may  be  taking  the  ode  entirely  "straight," 
or  deliberately  ignoring  its  heavy  irony.  Another  passage  in  the  same  poem 
raises  similar  questions.  In  line  32  the  sun  is  compared  to  the  centimanus  gigas 
oi  Odes  2.17.14  and  3.4.69.^^  To  Horace  the  giants,  named  or  not,  were  sym- 
bols of  unruly  and  disruptive  violence;  yet  Buchanan  is  prepared  to  use  one 
of  them  in  this  passage  which  to  many  interpreters  signified  Christ.  ^"^  Buch- 
anan evidently  dismisses  the  Horatian  overtones,  feeling  that  centimanus  would 
serve  as  a  very  apt  epithet  for  the  sun  and  perhaps  recalling  Homer's  "rosy- 
fmgered  dawn."  A  less  notable  warning  not  to  read  too  much  into  the  original 
context  is  given  by  the  commonly  used  phrase  ducit  adexitus  (14,32,  33.68,  57.8, 
61.12).  In  Horace  the  subject  of  the  sentence  is  Liber  or  Bacchus  {Odes  4.8.34), 
but  Buchanan  is  happy  to  use  it  of  God. 


ROGER  GREEN  77 

In  religious  matters  Buchanan's  attitude  to  his  model  is  less  strict,  probably 
because  the  equation  of  ongoing  religious  beliefs  with  an  obsolete  system  was 
less  serious  than  the  confusion  of  basically  different  ethical  structures.  Partic- 
ularly bold  is  the  frequent  use  of  olympus  for  heaven,  for  which  aethereae  domus 
from  Odes  1.3.29  is  also  found  in  102.61.  There  are  pagan  descriptions  of  prayer: 
so  mantis  /  caelo  supinas  tollite  in  134.6,  which  is  close  in  significant  respects  to 
caelo  supinas  si  tuleris  manus  {Odes  3.23. 1).  In  65.2  castis  operata  sacris  is  modelled 
on  iustis  operata  divis  {Odes  3.14.6);  one  might  detect  here  a  desire  to  "correct" 
the  original  but  no  other  feature  of  the  paraphrase  requires  this  interpretation, 
the  contrast  being  with  other  races  of  the  Psalmist's  time,  not  pagan  Rome. 
An  attempt  to  substitute  one  God  for  another  or  ascribe  pagan  attributes  to 
Jehovah  would,  however,  be  a  more  serious  matter;  we  have  seen  that  here 
Macrin  allowed  his  religious  zeal  to  override  his  literary  sensitivity.  Under  this 
head  two  passages  require  attention.  When  Buchanan  says  of  God  in  48.1-2 
cui  nil  viget  simile  aut  secundum  he  is  repeating  Horace's  description  of  Jupiter 
{Odes  1.12.18),  but  the  similarity  lies  not  in  an  assertion  but  in  the  denial;  the 
theology  here  is  apophatic.  The  other  passage  is  something  of  a  tour  deforce. 
Psalm  82  begins:  regum  timendorum  in  proprios  greges,  reges  in  ipsos  imperium  est 
lovae  —  v^hich.  is  identical  to  Odes  3.1.5-6,  except  that  Jove  becomes  Jehovah 
by  a  change  of  morpheme.  The  use  of  lova  to  denote  Jehovah  is  frequent  in 
the  translation  of  Castillo  that  first  appeared  in  1551,  and  had  doubtless  sug- 
gested itself  to  others  earlier,  but  is  used  nowhere  else  by  Buchanan,  who  must 
have  seen  in  Horace's  words  an  excellent  analogy  to  the  situation  of  the  Psalm. 
The  'gods'  or  judges  are  later  referred  to  as  purpureos  .  .  .  tyrannos,  and  there 
is  a  further  reminiscence  in  imperio  .  .  .  aequo  {Odes  1.35.12  and  3.4.48:  note 
also  regna  in  46). 

What  we  have  at  the  end  of  this  Psalm  is  an  implicit  analogy  between  the 
authority  of  the  Psalmist's  God  and  that  of  Horace's  princeps.  Elsewhere  this 
is  signalled  very  clearly  in  the  opening  of  Psalm  8  gentis  humanae  pater  atque  cus- 
tos,  taken  verbatim  from  Odes  1.12.49.  A  favourite  phrase  with  similar  over- 
tones is  ab  ortu  solis  ad  Hesperium  cubile  (46.32,  50.3-4),  slightly  recasting  Odes 
4.15.15-16.  In  Ps2ilm  46,  already  mentioned  a  number  of  times,  each  of  the 
words  vim,  tumultum  and  duelli  occurs  twice,  and  it  is  reasonable  to  see  here 
further  evidence  of  an  attempt  to  transfer  to  God  the  hopes  placed  in  Augustus 
(cf.  Odes  3.14.14-16).  Horace's  friendship  with  Maecenas  also  contributes  to 
Buchanan's  picture  of  the  Psalmist:  the  line  o  et  praesidium  et  dulce  decus  meum 
{Odes  1.1.2)  is  used  both  at  28.2  and  at  40.71.  So  too  does  Horace's  relation 
with  his  Muse:  the  line  quod  spiro  et  placeo,  si placeo,  tuum  est  {Odes  4.3.24)  gen- 
erates quod  vivo  et  valeo  .  .  .  totum  muneris  id  tui  est  (144.5  ff.)  and  two  similar 
phrases  in  35.65  f.  and  26.45  f.  Twice  the  Psalmist  is  made  to  call  himself  a 
vates  in  the  Horatian  manner  (71.50,  89.2);  elsewhere  he  is  rather  more  mod- 
est, as  in  87.21  et  nostra  si  quid  audiendum  vox  sonet.  This  recalls  Horace's  si  quid 
loquar  audiendum  {Odes  4.2.45),  where  with  feigned  modesty  he  imagines  his  role 


78  HORACE  AND  BUCHANAN 

in  the  coming  celebrations.  Horace's  prouder  claims  could  hardly  be  transfer- 
red so  directly,  and  are  used  with  care.  So  non  prius  audita  from  Odes  3.1.2-3 
is  used  of  God's  marvellous  works,  to  form  yet  another  Horatian  strand  in  the 
exceptional  Psalm  46;  and  non  usitato  from  Odes  2.20.1  refers  not  to  the  poet's 
fame,  but  to  the  new  song  that  the  Israelites  are  to  sing  (98.1-  2). 

The  analogy  at  the  personal  level  between  Horace  and  David  adds  a  new 
dimension  to  the  formal  similarities  in  metre  and  diction.  Vergilian  tones  can 
be  heard  in  the  hexameter  paraphrases,  and  Buchanan  inserts  a  couplet  into 
Psalm  137  to  draw  on  Ovid's  experience  of  exile;  but  Horace's  influence  is  far 
more  pervasive.  The  reader  is  moved  not  only  by  the  pleasure  of  recognition 
and  by  an  admiration  of  his  knowledge  but  also  by  the  sensitive  rapproche- 
ment of  the  two  cultures.  Buchanan  is  well  aware  that  differences  exist,  but 
has  too  much  respect  for  Horace  to  seek  to  replace  or  "improve"  him.  We  have 
seen  him  using  Horace  even  to  illuminate  Psalms  where  they  are  obscure,  and 
more  often  to  reinforce  a  well-known  message.  The  classical  poet  is  represented 
at  many  levels  and  in  many  ways,  and  the  representation  sheds  much  light 
on  Buchanan's  scholarship  and  sympathy.  Writers  of  paraphrases  were  rarely 
successful  in  avoiding  the  dangers  of  the  genre:  some  dazzle  (or  shock)  with 
a  virtuoso  treatment  of  formal  aspects,  while  for  many  it  is  enough  to  re-express 
the  original  in  passable  metre.  Buchanan's  great  merit  was  that  he  tastefully 
combined  instruction  and  enjoyment:  omne  tulit  punctum  qui  miscuit  utile  dulci. 

University  of  St  Andrews 


Notes 


1.  For  this  sort  of  "philological  acrobatism,"  see  J.  A.  Gaertner,  "Latin  Verse  Trans- 
lations of  the  Psalms,"  HTR  49  (1956),  273. 

2.  "George  Buchanan's  Psalm  Paraphrases:  Matters  of  Metre,"  in  Acta  of  the  Fifth  Con- 
gress of  Neo-Latin  Studies,  Binghamton  1986,  51-60. 

3.  "Matters  of  Metre"  (n.2),  55-6. 

4.  W.  Ludwig,  "Die  christliche  Dichtung  des  Prudentius  und  die  Transformationen 
der  Klassischen  Gattungen,"  in  Christianisme  et  Formes  Litteraires  de  I'Antiquite  Tardive  en 
Occident,  (Vandoeuvres  1977),  303-63. 

5.  These  writers  are  presumably  the  three  to  whom  Gagnay  refers,  pace  I.  D.  McFar- 
lane,  Buchanan  (London  1981),  p.  280. 

6.  Cf.  Jerome,  Ep.  53.8.17  (CSEL  54.461),  Comm.  in  Abacuc  2.1.1  {PL  25.2.1369), 
Comm.  in  Hieremiam  v.  3  (CC  74  237). 

7.  Gagnay's  claim  to  be  the  first  to  render  the  Psalms  as  odae  (Gaertner  [n.l],  273) 
seems  disingenuous  to  me. 

8.  The  reference  to  Maclean  I  owe  to  Dr.  J.  Durkan.  For  Cornelius  Musius  see  P. 
Noordeloos,  Cornelis  Musius,  (Utrecht,  1955). 


ROGER  GREEN  79 


9.  Bruta  in  43  may  be  inspired  by  Odes  1.34.9,  but  such  a  misunderstanding  seems 
unlikely. 

10.  W.  H.  Race,  The  Classical  Priamel  from  Homer  to  Boethius,  (Leyden,  1982). 

11.  See  my  article,  "The  Text  of  George  Buchanan's  Psalm  Paraphrases,"  The  Bib- 
liotheck,  1987,  3-29. 

12.  Serva  is  read  by  the  Basle  edition  of  1555. 

13.  Gigas  was  rejected  by  Lambinus  in  favour  of  Gyas. 

14.  See  Jerome,  Commentarioli  in  Psalmos,  18  {PLS  2.42). 


The  Commentary  of  Guillaume  Postel 

on  the  SibyUine  Verses  of  Vergil: 

An  Example  of  a  Renaissance 

Reading  of  the  Classics 

Marion  L.  Kuntz 

The  numerous  works  of  Guillaume  Postel  on  philosophy,  religion,  cos- 
mography, travel,  political  theories  and  cartography  are  filled  with 
allusions  to  classical  authors  of  Greece  and  Rome  as  well  as  to  the 
Hebrew  and  Arabic  commentators  and  to  the  Hebrew  prophets  and  mystics. 
In  the  early  part  of  his  career,  while  enjoying  the  ambience  of  the  Academy 
of  Francis  I  along  with  Guillaume  Bude  and  Francois  Vatable,  Postel  trans- 
lated into  French  the  Axiochus  of  Xenocrates,  and  he  composed  Latin  trans- 
lations from  Greek  epigrams.  He  commented  upon  the  De  Legibus  of  Cicero, 
the  Naturalis  auscultationis  libri  octo  of  Aristotle,  the  Eiepi  xou  axoueiv  of  Plutarch, 
and  the  De  ratione  victus  of  Psellus.  He  also  wrote  the  Sacrarum  Apodixeon  seu  Eu- 
clidis  Christiani  liber  II  and  a  Liber  de  Causis  based  upon  the  works  of  the  pseudo- 
Aristotle.^ 

Although  Postel's  annotations  of  classical  authors  and  his  books  and  broad- 
sheets about  classical  subjects  are  only  a  small  part  of  the  thousands  of  pages 
of  his  writing,  his  use  of  classical  authors  reveals  a  profound  knowledge  of  the 
ancient  past  which  provided  a  vitality  of  understanding  and  insight  into  the 
events  of  Postel's  own  day.  Postel's  commentary  on  Vergil's  so-called  "messi- 
anic" Eclogue  is,  in  my  opinion,  an  excellent  example  of  how  Renaissance  au- 
thors read  the  Classics  and  made  them  part  of  a  living  tradition. 

In  1553  Guillaume  Postel  published  in  Paris  his  Sibyllinorum  Versvvm  a  Vir- 
gilio  in  Qvarta  Bvcolicorum  Versvvm  Ecloga  Transcriptorvm  Ecfrasis  Commentarii  In- 
star,  which  contains  the  text  of  Vergil's  messianic  eclogue  and  a  commentary 
on  the  text.^  Postel  dedicated  his  Vergilian  text  to  Guillaume  du  Prat,  Bishop 
of  Clermont.^  In  the  opening  lines  he  indicated  to  the  Bishop  that  if  Vergil's 
Eclogue  were  read  superficially  as  a  poem  written  in  honor  of  the  son  of  a  Roman 
Senator,  then  the  work  would  not  be  worthy  of  dedication  to  the  noble  Bishop. 
However,  if  the  work  were  read  as  an  expression  of  "Sibylline  Enthusiasm," 
which  Postel  equates  with  the  most  Divine  Inspiration  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  then 
it  is  worthy  by  right  of  friendship  to  inform  the  Christian  world,  under  the 


82  GUILLAUME   POSTEL  ON  VERGIL 

auspices  of  the  Bishop,  that  there  are  sacred  predictions  in  the  possession  of 
the  lapetae  which  are  far  clearer  than  those  in  the  Canon.  Postel  boasts  that 
there  is  "no  worthier  evidence  in  the  ornament  of  the  Latin  or  ItaUan  Encyc- 
lopedia than  Vergil's  Sibylline  verses."  In  addition,  as  Vergil  conflated  the  opin- 
ion of  the  Cumaean  Sibyl  in  his  fourth  Eclogue,  so  Postel  sees  himself  as  the 
"instaurator  of  the  most  ancient  theology  which  is  most  true  in  the  principles 
prescribed  by  Noah  himself."  Postel  links  himself  with  Vergil,  since  each  knows 
how  to  interpret  the  past  in  order  to  comprehend  the  future. 

In  the  general  discussion  which  follows  the  text  of  Vergil's  poem,  Postel  notes 
that  Vergil  himself  related  his  Eclogues  to  Theocritus,  the  Georgics  to  Hesiod 
and  the  Aeneid  to  Homer.  Postel  argues  that  this  work  has  been  preserved  be- 
cause the  truth  contained  in  the  poem  is  most  efficacious  in  combatting  the 
lies  and  wickedness  of  men.  Postel  also  claims  that  the  very  same  truth  which 
was  received  from  the  sacred  writings  with  the  agreement  of  the  Church  of 
Shem  had  been  clearest  for  a  long  time  among  the  descendants  of  Japheth.'^ 

Because  Postel  wanted  to  demonstrate  divine  providence  operating  in  human 
history,  and  because  he  wanted  to  show  that  one  and  the  same  truth  had  been 
revealed  and  perceived  in  human  history,  he  uses  the  Flood  as  a  point  of  de- 
parture. He  relates  that  after  the  Flood  there  was  a  golden  age  under  Janus 
and  Saturn  in  which  all  the  arts  and  sciences  flourished  because  men  allowed 
reason  to  guide  them.^  Under  the  sway  of  reason  men  lived  most  justly,  and 
holy  men  were  rulers  of  a  holy  Empire.  In  this  golden  age  or  age  of  justice 
Postel  emphasizes  the  role  of  Janus  as  leader  and  parent  of  mankind.  Since 
Janus  was  most  skilled  in  Theology,  Astronomy,  and  Astrology,  he  trans- 
mitted to  posterity  these  precepts  of  divine  law.  From  the  judgments  of  Janus, 
the  Sibyls,  and  the  holy  men  of  the  Gentiles  (and  Postel  observes  that  Job  was 
one  of  these  holy  men)  prophecies  developed  in  a  continuous  tradition.^  Since 
the  Sibyls  revealed  the  teachings  of  Janus,  they  were  the  most  authoritative 
voices  of  religious  scruple;  from  the  time  of  Nemrod  to  the  time  of  Augustus, 
the  fulfillment  of  their  doctrine  was  placed  in  Cumae.  Postel  argues  that  the 
final  age  of  Cumaean  song,  which  all  antiquity  awaited,  was  dependent  upon 
the  instauration  of  a  golden  age  which  had  also  been  proclaimed  by  the  sacred 
vow  of  the  sons  of  Shem  under  Christ.^ 

According  to  Postel,  Providence  had  provided  for  the  descendants  of  Janus 
as  well  as  for  the  sons  of  Shem.  By  emphasizing  the  significance  of  the  sons 
of  Janus,  Postel  compliments  Vergil,  who,  as  a  descendant  of  Janus,  was  fol- 
lowing in  his  ancestors'  prophetic  footsteps.  Postel  has  a  more  important  pur- 
pose, however,  in  pointing  out  the  providential  care  for  the  sons  of  Janus.  He 
argues  that  because  of  the  ancient  piety  of  Janus  and  his  descendants,  the  sa- 
cred rights  of  the  Gentiles  have  been  established  before  those  of  the  Hebrews. 
In  addition,  Providence  has  granted  to  the  sons  of  Janus  the  administration 
of  the  temporal  magistracy  of  the  world. 

The  piety  of  Janus  and  his  role  as  a  parent  of  mankind  is  noted  in  numerous 


MARION   L.    KUNTZ  83 

works  of  Postel.  In  his  De  Etruriae  Regionis  .  .  .  Originibus  (Florcntiae,  1551)  Pos- 
tal relates  Janus  to  Noah,  and  the  two  become  synonymous.  Postel  writes: 

Nullum  itaque  a  Deo  Optimo  Maximo  unquam  beneficium,  per  Mentis 
vnivers2ilis  ministerium,  post  mundi  creationem  maius  accepimus,  quam 
quum  duce  lano  et  Deorum  et  hominum  parente  a  clade  aquarum  lib- 
erati  sumus.^ 

Postel  calls  his  mythological  technique  of  describing  history  emithologie  because 
it  reveals  emeth  or  truth. ^^  He  argues  that  in  the  Golden  Age  the  contempla- 
tion of  divine  and  human  things  led  the  best  men  to  see  that  they  should  apply 
various  names  to  one  and  the  same  things  in  order  to  comprehend  their  var- 
ious meanings.  According  to  Postel's  emithologie,  Janus,  an  ancient  king  of 
Etruria,  was  related  to  the  Kittim,  who  were  mentioned  by  Jeremiah  as  a  peo- 
ple who  settled  in  the  territory  between  the  Arno  and  the  Tiber  rivers  and  who 
remained  steadfast  in  their  devotion  to  God.^^  This  same  Janus  was  also  called 
Noah  in  the  Hebraic  view  of  history.  Although  Postel  does  not  explicitly  as- 
sociate Janus  with  Noah  in  his  commentary  on  the  "messianic"  eclogue,  the 
association  is  clear,  for  in  many  other  works  the  names  of  Janus  and  Noah 
are  interchangeable.  In  the  commentary  on  the  Sibylline  verse  he  describes 
Janus  as  "peritissimus  et  supra  .  .  .  tam  in  Theologicis  quam  in  Astronomicis 
et  Astrologicis  doctus."^^  In  his  Description  et  Charte  de  la  Terre  Saincte  .  .  .,  writ- 
ten in  the  same  year  as  the  commentary,  he  calls  Noah  "le  plus  grand  des  Pro- 
phetes  et  Astrologues."'^  Of  the  three  sons  of  Noah,  Shem,  Ham,  and 
Japheth,  Postel  mentions  the  Holy  lapetae  with  special  favor,  in  order  to  as- 
sociate them  more  closely  with  Janus  (or  Janus-Noah)  and  the  gentile  Italians. 
According  to  Postel's  mythology,  the  kingdom  of  Janus- Noah  was  in  Italy,  which 
he  called  Gaul.  Postel  also  designates  the  French,  German  and  Spanish  as 
Gauls.  In  fact,  Postel  says  that  the  Gauls  were  so  named  from  the  Hebrew 
word  Gallim,  which,  according  to  Postel,  means  "those  snatched  from  the 
waves. "^*  The  name  Galli  or  Gallim  was  given  to  the  descendants  of  Janus- 
Noah  to  safeguard  their  memory  of  the  flood  and  sovereign  miracle  of  the 
world. '^  The  identification  of  Janus  with  Noah  is  significant  in  interpreting 
Postel's  commentary  on  Vergil,  and  we  shall  return  to  it  later. 

In  the  concluding  lines  of  his  general  discussion  of  Vergil's  eclogue  Postel 
points  out  that  the  purpose  of  the  Cumaean  song  is  for  the  whole  world  to  be 
persuaded  by  the  use  of  reason  that  a  king  will  be  born  from  heavenly  seed 
and  that  under  his  rule  an  instauration  of  a  new  golden  age  will  be  accom- 
plished. Human  happiness  will  be  achieved  under  this  king  similar  to  that  which 
was  in  Italy  under  Janus  before  Italy  was  called  Italia  or  Atalia. 

After  his  introductory  remarks  Postel  then  glosses  individual  words  and  phra- 
ses which  develop  the  themes  suggested  in  the  general  discussion  of  the  text. 
We  shall  consider  only  a  few  of  the  most  significant.  Postel  glosses  Vergil's  mag- 
nus  ordo  saeclorum  with  the  words,  primum  instituta  rerum  Diuinae  Religionis  series; 


84  GUILLAUME   POSTEL  ON  VERGIL 

he  interprets  nascitur  ab  integro  to  mean  that  sicut  ab  initio  instituerat  Providentia 
vt  aliquando  nascerentur  et  restituerentur  omnia.  Postel's  comments  indicate  a  fa- 
mihar  theme:  the  order  of  divine  reUgion  had  been  estabUshed  in  the  begin- 
ning, and  Providence  had  ordained  that  this  order  would  be  reborn  and 
restored.  The  VergiHan  words  iam  redit  virgo  provide  Postel  with  the  oppor- 
tunity to  relate  this  idea  to  a  theme  which  is  central  to  his  metaphysics.  He 
writes: 

Virgo  ilia  virginum,  quae  Virgo  manens  in  aeternum,  virum  est  intra 
se  complexura,  vti  corpus  Animam,  Anima  Animum,  Animus  Spiritum, 
Spritus  Mentem,  Mens  Dei  centrum,  Ratio  Authoritatem,  noua  Mater- 
iae  arbitra,  quae  ab  initio  fuerat  instituta,  circundans  novum  Formae 
arbitrum,  vnde  summa  iustitia  dependere  in  hominibus  debebat.  Ideo 
Astreae  nomine,  eo  quod  est  corpore  Coelesti  praedita,  nuncupata  est. 
Ilia  quae  euolauerat  rediit  et  est  restituta.^^ 

In  Postel's  analysis  the  virgin  who  will  embrace  a  man  within  herself  does 
not  refer  to  the  Virgin  Mary  as  one  might  expect  in  this  so-called  messianic 
eclogue,  but  rather  to  a  mystical  Venetian  woman  who  lived  in  perpetual  vir- 
ginity while  serving  the  poor  and  sick  at  a  small  ridotto  near  the  Church  of  Saints 
John  and  Paul  in  Venice. ^^  Postel  claimed  that  the  spirit  of  Christ  came  to 
dwell  in  this  "very  holy  virgin  Johanna"  in  1540,  and  the  divine  presence,  which 
she  embodied  most  fully,  revealed  to  her  the  restitution  of  all  things  which  Pos- 
tel interpreted  to  be  the  new  golden  age.  In  Postel's  mind  this  virgin  became 
synonymous  with  the  Skekinah,  the  Divine  Presence;  since  she  embraced  this 
Presence  within  herself,  she  represented  the  Unity  of  All  Things.  She  also  rep- 
resented the  unity  of  form  and  matter  upon  which  the  highest  justice  of  man- 
kind depends.  For  this  reason  the  virgin  is  called  Astraea,  since  Astraea  was 
the  goddess  of  Justice  in  the  Golden  Age  who  finally  "abandoned  the  Earth, 
dripping  with  blood"  (Ovid,  Metamorph  1:45).  Astraea  in  Postel's  gloss  refers 
to  the  Venetian  Virgin  or  Mother  Johanna,  as  he  called  her.  She  is  the  symbol 
of  unity  and  justice  who  has  been  commanded  by  God  to  proclaim  to  her  spir- 
itual heir  that  all  reasonable  creatures  must  be  united  in  one  sheepfold  and 
that  a  general  pardon  for  all  with  no  exceptions  must  be  granted.  Like  Astraea 
the  Venetian  Virgin  has  departed  the  earth,  but  she  speaks  through  her  cho- 
sen/^^/w/o,  Postel.  Peace  and  harmony  of  the  universe  were  contingent  upon 
the  enactment  of  the  principles  of  reason,  unity,  and  pardon. 

In  the  last  line  of  this  important  gloss  Postel  wrote  that  "Astraea  had  as- 
cended; she  returned  and  is  restored."  This  is  a  reference  to  the  death  of  the 
Venetian  Virgin  in  1549  or  1550  and  her  return  to  Postel  in  a  mystical  ex- 
perience which  took  place  in  Paris  in  1552.  The  Virgin  of  Venice  returned 
to  him  in  a  spiritual  immutation  which  left  his  body  burning  for  three  months. 
As  his  old  body  was  purified  by  the  fire  of  the  spirit  of  the  Mother  of  the  World, 
he  became  a  new  spiritual  man  whose  reason  had  been  restored  to  its  original 


MARION   L.    KUNTZ  85 

perfection  before  the  fall.^^  When  Postel  writes  that  Astraea  est  restituta,  he 
means  that  she  has  been  restored  to  him. 

Another  significant  comment  accompanies  the  words  Saturnia  redeunt  regna. 
Postel  writes: 

Nam  et  lanus  primus  Deus  seu  Divus  Italiae  Saturnus  dictus  est,  et  trium 
fihorum  lovis  siue  Semi  Neptuni  siue  Camesis,  et  Plutonis  siue  lapeti 
Prisci  qui  Promethei  siue  Gomeri  pater  est,  et  Saeculum  aureum  insti- 
tuit,  antequam  Sabbathius  Saga  qui  et  Saturnus  secundus  est,  adueni- 
ret,  sub  quo  incoepit  ob  maledicti  patris  labem  saeculum  aureum 
corrumpi  redeunt  itaque  primi  Saturni  regna  Aurea  omnino  Resti- 
tuenda.^^ 

In  this  gloss  another  theme  dear  to  Postel  is  revealed;  namely,  the  univer- 
sality and  unity  of  history,  which  is  the  history  of  God's  Ecclesia.  Although  multi- 
ple events  in  history  are  viewed  from  multiple  perspectives,  there  is  a  unity 
of  purpose  which  is  inherent  in  the  multiplicity  of  creatures,  events,  and  the 
names  of  things.  Postel  writes  in  his  De  Regionis  Etruriae  .  .  .  Originibus  that  the 
Presence  of  God  in  the  universe  is  the  same  Christ,  whether  he  is  called  Janus, 
Vertumnus,  Proteus,  or  Noah.  In  his  commentary  on  the  Vergilian  line 
about  the  Saturnian  kingdoms  Postel  illustrates  the  premise  of  universality  by 
referring  to  Janus  as  he  who  was  called  Saturn  or  the  first  God  of  Italy  and 
whose  three  sons  were  Jupiter  or  Shem,  Neptune  or  Ham,  and  Pluto  or  Japh- 
eth,  the  father  of  Prometheus  or  Gomer.  By  associating  Janus  with  Noah  or 
Hellenism  with  Hebraism,  Postel  is  emphasizing  the  unity  of  all  things. 

In  his  commentary  on  "/am  tuus  regnat  Apollo/'  Postel  again  links  the  pagan 
world  to  the  Hebraic  when  he  writes: 

ilia  Divina  Virtus  Hapoel  siue  agens  suis  radiis  Diuinis  et  mouens  omnia 
ut  in  finem,  iam  regnat,  quia  corpus  sibi  aptauit  humanum  quo  duce 
regnet  etiam  inferius.^^ 

Hapoel  means  "the  worker"  in  Hebrew,  and  this  virtue,  according  to  Postel, 
is  acting  from  its  own  divine  rays  and  moving  all  things  to  their  end.  This  di- 
vine virtue  is  already  ruling,  and  it  will  rule  the  lower  world  in  human  form. 
In  the  Vergilian  poem  this  virtue  is  called  Apollo,  who  is  often  associated  with 
the  higher  developments  of  civilizations,  approving  codes  of  law  and  incul- 
cating high  moral  and  religious  principles. 

The  words  vestigia  sceleris  nostri  enable  Postel  to  link  the  pagan  world  to  the 
Christian  world  by  paraphrasing  Saint  Paul.  He  writes:  ''quae  in  corrupta  natura 
agnoscenda  erant  omnibus,  eo  quod  videbant  meliora,  probabantque  et  deteriora  sequeban- 
tur.'"' 

The  Vergilian  lines— "///^  deum  vitam  accipiet,  diuisque  videbit  /  Permistos  heroas, 
et  ipse  videbitur  illis:  /  Paccatumque  reget  patriis  virtuibus  orbem.  "^^  —  provide  Postel 
with  the  opportunity  of  commenting  again  on  his  theme  of  the  restitution  of 


86  GUILLAUME  POSTEL  ON  VERGIL 

all  things.  The  ille  of  Vergil's  lines  becomes  for  Postel  the  god-man  who  will 
see  men  made  immortal  with  heavenly  bodies.  These  heroes  become  divine, 
and  the  origin  of  their  lives  is  the  god-man.  They  will  live  as  gods  and  heroes 
because  of  him.  He  will  rule  a  world  of  peace  because  of  the  infmite  virtues 
of  the  Father,  who  is  heavenly  and  eternal.^* 

When  Vergil  wrote  of  the  goats  returning  home  with  their  udders  full  of  milk, 
Postel  associates  this  with  the  region  of  Syria  and  Phoenicia  which,  before  all 
other  regions,  flows  with  milk  and  honey  and  is  the  foundation  of  the  King- 
dom of  the  "King  Who  Must  Be  Called  King."  When  true  peace  is  established 
upon  the  earth,  all  creatures  will  be  at  peace  with  each  other;  the  wolf  will 
live  with  a  lamb  and  the  serpent  with  a  child.  According  to  Postel,  the  serpent 
will  die  because  hypocrisy  and  other  poisons  will  perish,  and  man  consequently 
will  be  restored. 

When  Vergil  in  his  poem  alluded  to  the  concept  of  virtue,  Postel  uses  this 
opportunity  to  elucidate  his  own  interpretation.  He  notes  that  before  the  god- 
man  came,  no  one  knew  what  virtue  was,  and  men  robbed  God  of  His  honor 
by  their  pretense  of  virtue.  Postel  defmes  virtue,  accordingly: 

Vera  enim  virtus  in  Paupertate,  Dolore,  et  Probro  propter  Deum  sub- 
eundo  posita  est  quam  primus  ipse  docturus  erat." 

The  Postellian  concept  of  virtue  in  which  man  endures  poverty,  grief,  and 
abuse  for  the  sake  of  God  is  a  theme  which  permeates  his  published  and  un- 
published works.  The  great  virtue  attributed  to  Postel's  beloved  Mother  Jo- 
hanna resided  in  Paupertate,  Dolore,  et  Probro,  according  to  numerous  statements 
of  Postel. ^^  The  Venetian  Virgin  demonstrated  by  her  life  the  virtue  of  char- 
ity which  Postel  like  Saint  Augustine  considered  the  sum  of  all  the  virtues.  The 
virtue  of  love,  directed  toward  God,  diffuses  itself  into  active  works  of  charity. 
In  order  to  participate  in  the  restitution  of  all  things  all  men  must  adopt  the 
virtue  oi^ Amor  Dei,  Vnitiua  virtus,  charitas  in  proximum^  virtus  diffusiva  sui."  Vita 
activa  is  illustrated  by  the  life  of  the  Venetian  Virgin,  according  to  Postel.  The 
virtue  which  Postel  refers  to  as  Hapoel  and  which  Vergil  calls  Apollo  defmes 
the  life  and  works  of  Postel's  Mother  Zuana.  Again  we  see  that  Postel  uses 
the  ancient  poem  as  an  exemplar  for  his  own  religious  and  political  ideals.  His 
gloss  on  ''Et  durae  quercus  sudabunt  roscida  melld'  is  another  example  of  this  prin- 
ciple. To  explain  roscida  mella  Postel  writes:  '^quxie  roris  instar  vti  manna  stillabunt, 
vt  in  sola  Syria  et  proprietate  regis  adorandi  videtur  affatim  fieri.  ^^  The  theme  of  dew 
is  dear  to  Postel's  heart;  the  dew  which  gives  life  to  man  and  plants  is  inter- 
preted by  Postel  to  mean  a  general  resurrection  or  rebirth  of  mankind  into 
a  new  spiritual  life.  Dew  becomes  for  Postel  a  symbol  of  a  universal  renais- 
sance, and  he  equates  dew  with  the  manna  which  fed  the  children  of  Israel 
in  the  desert. 

In  his  commentary  on  "pauca  tamen  suberunt  priscae  vestigia  fraudis"  Postel  ack- 
nowledges that  there  are  still  traces  of  original  sin;  he  argues,  however,  that 


MARION   L.    KUNTZ  87 

a  new  age  of  heroes  has  begun. ^^  The  Vergihan  Une  which  describes  another 
Argo  for  carrying  chosen  heroes  is  considered  by  Postel  to  be  prophetic  of  the 
voyages  of  discovery  in  his  own  age.  The  age  of  discovery  heralds  the  new  age 
of  heroes.  In  this  age  of  heroes  Postel  believes  that  art  and  virtue  must  be  ac- 
complished, ''ne  Deus  sua  in  quaquam  intentione  fraudetur.''^^  Postel  uses  the  Ver- 
gilian  line  about  the  heroic  age  to  focus  upon  the  central  tenet  of  his  religious 
philosophy,  namely,  God  willed  that  all  be  saved  with  no  exceptions,  and  that 
the  age  of  universal  restitution  had  indeed  arrived.  Postel's  gloss  on  ""atque  ite- 
rum  ad  Troiam  magnus  mittetur  Achilles''  also  exemplifies  the  point.  He  writes  that 
"in  the  name  of  all  those  who  have  been  damned  before  they  were  born,  there 
is  need  that  the  Crowns  be  restored,  so  that  all  the  Crowns  which  had  not  been 
received  by  those  to  whom  they  had  been  destined  be  received  by  others."^' 
The  universality  of  the  concept  of  restitution  is  emphasized  by  Postel's  next 
statement.  He  notes: 

Haec  est  Sacrorum,  Sibyllarum,  Abrahmanum,  Platonicorum,  Pythag- 
oraeorum,  Mosis  auditorum,  et  Rationis  Restitutionisque  omnium  sen- 
tentia,  quam  sub  facinore  Troiani  belli  vt  in  sexto  Aeneidos  exponit.^^ 

It  is  impossible  in  the  limits  of  this  study  to  discuss  all  of  Postel's  glosses 
on  Vergil's  fourth  eclogue;  however,  those  which  we  have  omitted  illustrate 
the  points  which  have  already  been  presented.  In  his  fmal  gloss  Postel  states 
that  the  history  of  the  universe  has  demonstrated  that  all  ages  have  awaited 
the  king  and  savior  of  the  world  who  has  been  proclaimed  by  sages  and  pro- 
phets in  2ill  cultures.  He  pointed  out  that  Cicero  in  the  second  book  of  the  De 
Natura  deorum  had  indicated  that  Augustus  had  refused  the  designation  of  uni- 
versal king  which  had  been  offered  by  the  Roman  people  because  the  Tib- 
urtine  Sibyl  had  taught  him  the  true  interpretation  of  the  words. ^^ 

The  conclusion  of  Postel's  commentary  contains  fifteen  points  which  sum- 
marize the  true  meaning  of  Vergil's  eclogue.  The  two  most  significant  con- 
clusions are  that  when  each  man  is  restored,  the  whole  world  will  become  '^omnis 
in  omnibus,''  just  as  God  is  ""omnia  in  omnibus."  Jew  and  Gentile  will  reside  in 
the  same  home  so  that  "duce  Ratione  eadem  cognoscantur  inter  Gentiles,  quae 
cognita  sunt  per  fidem  inter  Fideles."^* 

Postel's  commentary  on  Vergil's  fourth  eclogue  is  an  example  of  one  use  which 
Renaissance  humanists  made  of  their  classical  learning.  The  study  of  ancient 
texts  was  not  solely  a  philological  endeavor  nor  was  the  meaning  of  these  texts 
moribund  to  them.  To  a  humanist  like  Postel  ancient  texts  were  important  be- 
cause they  contained  univers2il  truths  applicable  to  all  ages;  consequently,  an- 
cient texts  should  be  read  in  the  light  of  univers2il  truths  contained  in  them. 

Postel  was  one  of  the  most  learned  philologists  of  the  Cinquencento,  having 
mastered  not  only  Greek  and  Latin,  but  also  Hebrew,  Arabic,  Syriac,  Ara- 
maic, and  the  vulgar  languages  of  his  day.  Yet  he  used  his  vast  philologiccd 


88  GUILLAUME  POSTEL  ON  VERGIL 

knowledge  not  as  a  pedantic  exercise  but  as  a  means  of  conveying  ancient  truth 
to  his  own  age.  He  used  Vergil's  fourth  eclogue  to  confirm  his  own  philosoph- 
ical and  religious  commitment  to  universal  brotherhood  and  universal  resti- 
tution. Postel's  commentary  is  yet  another  example  of  the  dynamic  nature  of 
classical  studies  in  the  Renaissance. 

Georgia  State  University,  Atlanta 


Notes 


1 .  For  the  life  of  Postel  see  Andre  Thevet,  Les  Vrais  Portraits  et  vies  des  hommes  illustres 
Grecz,  Latin  et  Payens  (Paris,  1584)  Livre  6,  Chap.  123,  feuilles  588-90;  Paul  Colomies, 
Gallia  orientalis  (The  Hague,  1655),  pp.  59-66;  Isaac  Bullart,  Academie  des  sciences  et  des 
arts,  contenant  les  vies,  et  les  eloges  historiques  des  hommes  illustres  qui  ont  excelle  en  ces  professions 
(Brusselle,  1695),  pp.  297-99.  Jean  Pierre  Niceron,  Memoires  pour  servir  a  I'histoire,  des 
hommes  illustres  dans  la  republique  des  lettres  (Paris,  1729)  Tom.  8,  pp.  295-356;  Jacques 
George  de  Chaufepie,  Nouveau  Dictionnaire  historique  et  critique  (Amsterdam,  1750), 
3:215-36;  Pere  des  Billons,  S.J. ,  Nouveau^  Eclaircissements  sur  la  vie  et  les  ouvrages  de  Guil- 
laume  Postel  (Liege,  1773);  G.  Weill,  De  Gulielmi  Postelli  vita  et  indole  (Paris,  1892);  Jan 
Kvacala,  "Wilhelm  Postell,  eine  Geistesart  und  seine  Reform gedanken,"^rc^/y/Mr  Re- 

formationsgeschichte,  vo\.  9  {\9n-\9\2),  pp.  285-330;  11  (1914),  pp.  200-227;  15(1918), 
pp.  157-203;  and  more  recently,  William  J.  Bouwsma,  Concordia  Mundi:  The  Career  and 
Thought  ofGuillaume  Postel  (1510-1581)  (Cambridge,  Mass. :  Harvard  University  Press, 
1957);  Marion  L.  Kuntz,  Guillaume  Postel,  Prophet  of  the  Restitution  of  all  Things  (The  Hague: 
Martinus  Nijhoff,  1981). 

2.  It  was  published  at  Paris. 

3.  Some  oriental  manuscripts  of  Postel  came  to  the  College-Louis  le  Grand  (College 
de  Clermont),  a  Jesuit  College.  See  Giorgio  Levi  della  Vida,  Ricerche  sulla  Formazione 
del  piiL  anticofondo  dei  manoscritti  orientali  della  Biblioteca  Vaticana  (Citta  del  Vaticano:  Bib- 
lioteca  Apostolica  Vaticana,  1939)  p.  323. 

4.  See  the  preface  of  the  Sibyllinorvm  versvvm  a  Virgilio  Bvcolicorvm  versvvm  Ecologa  . 

5.  Ibid.,  sig.  aiii".  Also  see  M.  Kuntz,  "Umanesimo,  disseno  e  riforma  nel  pensi- 
ero  di  Guglielmo  Postello"  in  Studi  Umanistici  Piceni  F(Istituto  internazionale  Studi  Pic- 
eni:  Sassoferrato,  1985)  a  cura  di  Stefano  Troiani  e  Sesto  Prete,  pp.  199-130. 

6.  Sibyllinorvm  versvvm  a  Virgilio  Bvcolicorvm  versvvm  Ecloga  .  .  .,  sig.  aiii^. 

7.  Ibid. 

8.  See  M.  Kuntz,  "Guillaume  Postel  and  the  World  State:  Restitution  and  the  Uni- 
versal Monarchy,"  History  of  European  Ideas  4,  no.  3  (1983):  299-323;  4,  no.  4  (1983): 
445-65. 

9.  De  Etruriae  Regionis  .  .  .  Originibus  (Florentiae,  1551),  p.  197;  note  also  Abscondi- 
torvm  a  constitutione  mundi  clavis  .  .  .,  cap.  9,  sig.  c2''-c3. 

10.  Bibliotheque  nationale,  fonds  lat.  3401,  fol.  58;  see  F.  Secret,  "L'Emithologie 
de  Guillaume  Postel,"  Archivo  di  Filosofia,  Umanesimo  e  Esoterismo  (1960),  pp.  381-437; 
De  Etruriae  Regionis  .  .  .  Originibus  .  .  .  pp.  67-69. 


MARION   L.    KUNTZ  89 

11.  The  British  Library,  Sloane  ms.  1411,  fol.  233. 

12.  Sibyllinorvm  versvvm  a  Virgilio  in  qvarta  Bvcolicorvm  versvvm  Ecloga  .  .  .,  sig.  aiii". 

13.  See  Description  et  Charte  de  la  Terre  Saincte  .  .  . ,  p.  108;  note  also,  M.  Kuntz,  "Guil- 
laume  Postel  and  the  World  State:  Restitution  and  the  Universal  Monarchy,"  History 
of  European  Ideas  4,  no.  4  (1983)  Part  2,  pp.  447-49. 

14.  Description  et  Charte  de  la  Terre  Saincte  .  .  .,  p.  108. 

15.  Ibid. 

16.  Sibyllinorvm  Versvvm  .  .  . ,  sig.  aiiii.  Compare  also  The  British  Library,  Sloane  MS 

1410,  fol.  sr. 

17.  See  M.  Kuntz  "Guglielmo  Postello  e  la  'Vergine  Veneziana':  Appunti  storici  sulla 
vita  spirituale  dell'Ospedaletto  nel  Cinquecento,"  Quaderni2\  (Venezia:  Centro  Tedesco 
di  Studi  Veneziani,  1981);  Guillaume  Postel.  Prophet  of  the  Restitution  of  All  Things.  His 
Life  and  Thought  (The  Hague:  Martinus  Nijhoff,  1981),  pp.  69-93,  101-8. 

18.  Bibliotheque  nationale,  fonds  franc.  2115,  fol.  111''. 

19.  Sibyllinorvm  Versvvm  .  .  .,  sig.  aiiii. 

20.  De  Regionis  Etruriae  .  .  .  Originibus,  p.  96. 

21.  Sibyllinorvm  Versvvm  .  .  .,  sig.  aiiii^. 

22.  Ibid. 

23.  11.  15-17. 

24.  Sibyllinorvm  Versvvm  .  .  .,  sig.  aiiii^. 

25.  Ibid.;  cf.  Bibliotheque  nationale,  fonds  lat.  3401,  fol.  38. 

26.  The  British  Library,  Sloane  MS  1411,  fols.  2,  439. 

27.  The  British  Library,  Sloane  MS  1411,  fol.  439\  See  also  M.  Kuntz,  Prophet  of 
the  Restitution  of  All  Things  .  .  .,  pp.  77-85. 

28.  Sibyllinorvm  Versvvm  .  .  .,  sig.  av. 

29.  Ibid. 

30.  Ibid. 

31 .  Ibid. ;  "nam  omnium  eorum  nomine,  qui  prius  damnati  quam  fuere,  restitui  Cor- 
onas opus  est,  vt  omnes  Coronae  quas  non  accepere  illi  quibus  erant  destinatae,  ac- 
cipiantur  ab  aliis." 

32.  Ibid. 

33.  Ibid.,  sig.  av^. 

34.  Ibid.,  sib.  avi. 


Thomas  More's  Utopia 
as  Dialogue  and  City  Encomium 

Andrew  M.  McLean 


Readers  from  the  sixteenth  century  to  the  present  disagree  on  how 
to  read  More's  Utopia.  The  difficulty  is  caused,  in  part,  by  More's 
blending  together  two  literary  genres  dear  to  Renaissance  human- 
ists: the  dialogue  and  the  city  encomium.  In  fact.  More  plays  with  the  formula 
or  conventions  of  these  genres  in  such  a  way  as  to  confuse  reader  expectations 
based  on  the  choice  of  genre.  An  author's  choice  of  genre  places  the  literary 
work  within  a  frame  of  reference  and  elicits  certain  expectations  from  the  reader. 
Literary  genres  designate  distinct  types  or  categories  according  to  a  form  or 
technique  used  (or,  sometimes,  because  of  subject  matter).  Such  classification 
suggests  that  there  are  formal  or  technical  characteristics  that  define  a  partic- 
ular group  of  works.  The  effective  use  of  genre  in  a  literary  work  implies  that 
these  characteristics  are  shared  by  both  author  and  reader.  The  author  works 
within  the  conventions  of  the  genre  and  the  reader,  based  on  some  familiarity 
with  those  conventions,  anticipates  them  in  the  literary  work. 

While  conscious  of  a  literary  genre's  conventions  and  characteristics.  Re- 
naissance humanists  often  used  them  for  their  own  purpose,  or  by  altering  the 
conventions,  moved  the  genre  in  new  directions.  More's  use  of  the  traditions 
of  the  dialogue  and  the  encomia  of  cities  shows  how  he  benefited  from  classical 
learning  while  forwarding  the  aims  of  humanism.  My  purpose  is  first  to  com- 
ment on  the  dialogue  tradition  known  to  More  and  his  humanistic  circle,  and 
then  to  explore  how  in  composing  the  Utopia  More  effectively  confronts  the 
reader  with  a  variety  of  kinds  of  dialogue  within  the  Utopia  itself.  Secondly, 
I  shall  discuss  the  Utopia  as  an  encomium  of  a  country,  part  of  the  encomia 
of  city  genre  well-known  to  More's  fellow  humanists.  Finally,  I  shall  suggest 
how  the  blending  of  these  genres  creates  a  special  context  in  which  to  read  and 
to  understand  the  Utopia. 

The  importance  of  dialogue  to  the  structure  of  Utopia  has  been  explored  and 
studies  of  the  Tudor  or  Renaissance  dialogue  tradition  identify  classical  an- 
tecedents in  Plato,  Cicero,  and  Lucian.'  Wilson  discusses  the  dialogue  as  a 


92  UTOPIA  AS  DIALOGUE  AND  CITY  ENCOMIUM 

"medial  art,"  that  is,  as  a  form  that  mirrors  the  Renaissance  humanists'  role 
as  mediators  between  ideas  of  antiquity  and  their  own  world  while  Marsh  com- 
ments on  the  humanistic  nature  of  Cicero's  dialogues  which  demonstrate  "the 
inseparability  of  the  individual's  learning  from  his  role  in  society"  (8).  Further- 
more, as  Kinney  observes,  More's  achievement  is  that  he  uses  a  traditional 
form  of  rhetoric  —  the  demonstrative  oration  — to  reveal  rhetorical  sophistry: 
we  can  view  the  Utopia  as  a  typical  suasoria.  Yet,  More's  rhetorical  stance  may 
be  even  be  more  complex  than  Kinney  suggests.  McCutcheon,  for  example, 
explores  this  complexity  in  terms  of  More's  prefatory  letter  to  Peter  Giles,  the 
art  of  which  she  characterizes  as  "an  aesthetic  of  honest  deception"  (5).  The 
importance  of  the  dialogue  form  as  a  rhetorical  strategy  in  Utopia  becomes  clear 
when  seen  in  relationship  to  the  genesis  and  the  order  of  composition  of  the 
prefatory  letters  to  fellow  humanists,  the  dialogue  of  Book  1  between  persona 
More,  Giles,  and  Hythlodaeus,  and  the  declamatio  cum  monologue  of  Book  2 
extolling  life  in  Utopia.  There  is  general  agreement  with  Hexter's  reconstruc- 
tion of  the  composition  of  Utopia  and  his  thesis  that  More  first  wrote  the  dis- 
course on  Utopia  (the  present  Book  1)  together  with  some  kind  of  peroration 
and  conclusion,  and  later  added  the  dialogue  of  Book  1  including  a  revision 
of  the  peroration  and  conclusion  to  Book  2 .  He  then  wrote  the  letter  to  Giles 
and  solicited  other  prefatory  epistles  from  well-known  friends.  When  viewed 
as  a  whole  in  the  order  of  composition  the  Utopia  demonstrates  a  pattern  of  in- 
creased sophisticated  use  of  the  dialogue  form.  We  move  from  a  monologic 
declamatio  in  Book  2,  to  a  conventional  Ciceronian  dialogue  in  Book  1,  to  a 
public  and  internal  dialogue  in  the  prefatory  letters. 

Erasmus  and  More  translated  Lucian's  dialogues  and  declamations  as  early 
as  1505-1506.  Lucian's  Tyrannicide  (to  which  More  wrote  a  rejoiner)  is  a  rhe- 
torical exercise  in  which  the  speaker  resolves  a  hypothetical  problem  by  rais- 
ing objections  to  his  own  position  and  then  answering  them.  Since  the  objections 
are  raised  on  behalf  of  the  audience,  these  declamations  may  be  considered 
quasi-dialogues  or  dialogue  manque  to  distinguish  them  from  soliloquies  or 
monologues  which  do  not  necessarily  take  the  audience  into  account.  The  es- 
sential fact  about  declamatio  is  that  its  author  "professedly  commits  himself  to 
an  imagined,  fictive  argument,  and  thereby  claims  immunity  from  being  taken 
literally."^  Lucian's  influence  is  especially  noticeable  in  Raphael's  declamation 
in  Book  2  of  Utopia. 

But  it  is  to  Cicero  and  Quintilian  that  More  and  his  humanist  friends  turned 
for  a  full  discussion  of  two  kinds  oi  declamatio .  In  the  suasoria  an  eminent  char- 
acter is  imagined  to  deliberate  with  himself,  while  the  controversia  handles  a  ficti- 
tious case  in  imitation  of  actual  court  pleadings.  To  lawyer  More  Cicero's 
discussion  oi  declamatio  in  De  Inventore  in  terms  of  judicial  hypotheses  or  con- 
troversiae  might  have  particular  appeal,  but  Quintilian's  emphasis  (in  Institutio 
Oratoria  2.10)  on  verisimilitude  and  veracity  are  even  more  suggestive  when 
applied  to  Raphael's  discourse.  Quintilian  wishes  for  innovations  in  the  genre: 


ANDREW  M.    MCLEAN  93 

"that  we  made  use  of  names,  that  our  fictitious  debates  dealt  with  more  com- 
pUcated  cases  and  sometimes  took  longer  to  deliver,  that  we  were  ...  in  the 
habit  of  seasoning  our  words  with  jests"  (2.10.9).  Above  all,  Quintilian  ob- 
serves, "we  ought  to  unbend  a  little  for  the  entertainment  of  our  audience" 
(2.10.10).  It  is  clear  that  More  has  implemented  such  innovations  in  the 
Utopia  — y^hether  or  not  he  had  Quintilian  in  mind. 

What  is  central  to  the  present  discussion,  however,  is  that  like  a  monologue, 
a  declamatio  tends  to  characterize  the  speaker.  In  Book  2  of  Utopia  we  learn  a 
lot  about  Raphael,^  not  only  in  autobiographical  statements  but  also  in  his 
casual  references  to  his  audience  and  in  the  zeal  he  displays  for  Utopian  ideas. 
In  fact,  because  More  wrote  Book  2  first,  he  probably  based  the  character  of 
Hythlodaeus  in  Book  1  on  Raphael's  declamatio  in  Book  2.  Raphael  wants  to 
convince  his  audience  about  the  superiority  of  Utopian  values  and  institutions; 
the  questions  raised  by  a  speaker  in  a  declamatio  often  force  the  audience  to 
a  point  of  agreement.  Thus  the  questions  raised  by  Raphael  play  an  impor- 
tant role  by  enticing  the  reader  into  accepting  his  argument.  For  example,  Ra- 
phael expresses  his  own  incredulity  over  what  the  Utopians  do  with  gold,  before 
discussing  how  they  use  it  for  toilets  and  prisoner's  chains.  He  asks  who  will 
not  break  the  law  if  there  is  no  belief  in  life  after  death  before  explaining  Utop- 
ian religious  practices.  Such  questions,  of  which  there  are  many,  push  Book 
2  in  the  direction  of  a  dramatic  debate  or  dialogue  between  the  speaker  and 
an  audience  whose  objections  and  observations  are  constantly  impinging  on 
its  argument.  Since  many  of  the  objections  are  reasonable  and  many  of  Ra- 
phael's points  vainly  idealistic,  the  declamatio  has  an  element  of  self-parody. 

Verisimilitude  in  Book  2  is  established  in  part  by  the  ethos  of  Raphael;  he 
is  earnest  in  his  presentation  and  seasons  his  description  with  wit  and  humor. 
Yet,  Raphael's  discourse  has  the  effect  of  a  "one-sided  dialogue"  for  Surtz  be- 
cause Raphael's  answers  to  supposed  questions,  together  with  the  "antagonisms 
of  the  invisible  rich,  the  imperatives  and  exclamations,  [and]  the  conscious- 
ness of  an  audience"  are  more  dramatic  than  a  monologue  and  leave  the  reader 
puzzled  as  to  the  form  of  the  discourse  (cxxxix).  But  is  it  not  just  these  qual- 
ities that  make  a  declamatio  effective? 

Hexter  argues  that  Book  2  was  written  in  the  Netherlands,  and  when  More 
returned  to  England,  he  wrote  Book  1.  The  first  Book  is  clearly  modeled  on 
Cicero's  De  oratore  with  some  echoes  of  Plato's  Symposium,  and  the  character- 
ization of  Hythlodaeus  in  Book  1  is  deduced  from  the  presentation  of  his  char- 
acter in  Book  2.  Taking  his  cue  from  Cicero's  De  oratore^  More  establishes  the 
verisimilitude  of  setting  and  character  by  placing  the  fictitious  Raphael  in  a 
realistic  historical  context.  He  juxtaposes  Raphael  against  known  historical  per- 
sonages including  himself  (Thomas  More),  Peter  Giles,  and  Cardinal  Mor- 
ton. In  order  of  composition,  we  move  from  Book  2's  declamatio  or  dialogue 
manque,  to  a  more  traditional  form  of  dialogue  in  Book  1,  a  conversation  be- 
tween recognizable  characters.  Here  More  the  author  attacks  the  evils  of  the 


94  UTOPIA  AS   DIALOGUE  AND  CITY   ENCOMIUM 

time;  the  impact  of  Raphael's  analysis  of  England's  ills  is  heightened  by  the 
use  of  a  dialogue  within  a  dialogue.  Raphael  recounts  previous  conversations 
in  the  household  of  John  Cardinal  Morton  when  he  was  Lord  Chancellor  of 
England.  This  removes  Raphael's  criticism  of  English  society  to  a  previous  era, 
and  distances  further  Raphael's  relationship  with  the  reader.  Through  More 
the  persona,  then,  the  reader  receives  a  third-hand  account  of  Raphael's  con- 
versation at  Cardinal  Morton's  court.  What  is  significant  about  the  dialogue 
in  Book  1,  in  addition  to  its  distancing  effect,  is  that  it  ends  inconclusively. 
The  answer  to  Giles'  question  to  Hythlodaeus  about  why  he  does  not  attach 
himself  to  some  king  is  left  in  solution.  Arguments  are  presented,  but  no  one 
seems  to  win. 

A  final  use  of  dialogue  is  found  in  the  prefatory  letter  to  Peter  Giles  that 
is  essential  to  the  structure  of  the  Utopia  2ind  to  an  understanding  of  how  fully 
More  exploits  the  dialogue  genre.  The  letter  to  Giles,  as  well  as  those  added 
in  subsequent  editions  with  More's  approval,  constitutes  a  public  dialogue  which 
gives  the  impression  that  Bude,  Busleyden,  Erasmus  and  others  are  contin- 
uing the  dialogue,  with  one  another  and  with  More,  and  "even  more  signi- 
ficantly, within  their  own  national  and  cultural  communities."^  These  letters, 
together  with  examples  of  the  Utopian  alphabet  and  poetry,  prepare  the  reader 
for  the  satiric  thrust  of  the  Utopia  and  they  attempt  to  make  credible  the  char- 
acter of  Raphael  Hythlodaeus.  More  asks  Giles,  for  example,  to  have  Hyth- 
lodaeus verify  More's  account;  he  wonders  if  Giles  can  remember  more  clearly 
a  point  of  minor  detail.  McCutcheon  observes  how  the  marginal  glosses  which 
accompany  the  Utopia  carry  on  a  dialogue  with  the  text,  and  in  the  prefatory 
letter  to  Giles  the  separate  typography  for  the  marginalia  "unites  the  letter  vis- 
ually with  the  two  books  which  follow  it"  (19).  These  prefatory  letters  draw 
the  reader  into  the  ironic  point  of  view  which  is  the  foundation  of  Utopia  and 
they  are,  in  effect,  a  final  refinement  of  the  dramatic  and  dialogic  techniques 
initiated  by  the  declamatio  of  Book  2  which  More  wrote  first.  The  varieties  of 
dialogue  More  uses  beguile  the  reader  into  accepting  the  reality  of  his  ideal 
island,  and  they  reinforce  the  credibility  of  the  movement  from  the  prefatory 
letters  to  Book  2  so  effectively  that  once  we  begin  reading  Raphael's  declamatio 
we  no  longer  doubt  the  island's  existence,  nor  the  speaker's  credibility  as  a  hu- 
manist and  moral  philosopher. 

More's  fellow  humanists,  like  readers  today,  were  enthralled  by  the  fantas- 
tic elements  of  Raphael's  ideal  commonwealth.  But  unlike  readers  of  today, 
More's  contemporaries  would  have  recognized  in  Raphael's  description  many 
of  the  conventions  characteristic  of  the  city  encomium.  The  encomiastic  genre 
flourished  during  the  Renaissance,  and  there  was  a  large  number  of  works  prais- 
ing cities  during  the  first  decades  of  the  sixteenth  century.  City  poems  were 
written  by  humanists  throughout  Europe,  many  of  whom  were  known  to  More 
or  to  his  circle  of  friends.  Erasmus,  More's  closest  friend,  for  example,  wrote 
the  Encomium  Selestadii  elegiaco  in  honor  of  a  town  in  lower  Alsace  (Schlettstadt) 


ANDREW   M.    MCLEAN  95 

at  about  the  same  time  that  More  was  finishing  the  Utopia.  Johannes  Cocha- 
laeus,  Luther's  severe  opponent,  corresponded  with  More  in  the  1520s  and  may 
have  been  known  to  More  earUer.  Cochalaeus  copied  and  paraphrased  the  fa- 
mous oration  of  Nuremberg  by  Conrad  Celtis,  the  Norimberga  (1495;  printed 
1502).  Cochalaeus  made  some  additions  of  his  own,  but  what  is  important  here 
is  to  note  how  this  close  imitation  of  Celtis  is  indicative  of  the  influence  this 
patriotic,  highly  rhetorical  and  well-planned  prose  city  oration  had  on  contem- 
porary humanists.  Another  representative  humanist  writer  of  encomia,  Her- 
mann Buschius  (1468-1534),  wrote  encomia  on  Roermond  in  Holland  (c.  1500), 
Leipzig  (1504),  and  a  famous  one  on  Cologne  (1508)  that  established  his  rep- 
utation. Buschius,  like  many  other  humanists,  led  a  migratory  life,  taught  in 
numerous  cities,  and  visited  many  countries  including  England  in  1516.  An 
English  humanist,  Richard  Croke  (1489?- 1558)  spent  time  at  Louvain,  Col- 
ogne, and  Leipzig,  As  a  student  he  took  service  in  the  household  of  Grocyn, 
the  famous  Greek  scholar  living  in  London  who  was  a  close  friend  of  both  Er- 
asmus and  Thomas  More.  Croke  corresponded  with  More  and  was  well-known 
to  Erasmus  who  called  him  "the  great  man  in  the  University  of  Leipzig."^ 
Croke's  encomium  of  Leipzig  (1515)  is  appropriate  to  one  who  served  as  the 
university's  first  full-time  lecturer  in  Greek.  These  representative  examples  sug- 
gest that  the  city  encomium  tradition  is  alive  and  well  at  the  turn  of  the  six- 
teenth century.  The  genre  is  clearly  part  of  the  intellectual  milieu  in  which 
More  studied  the  classics  and  in  which  the  Utopia  was  written. 

From  very  early  in  classical  antiquity  people  were  aware  of  the  importance 
of  their  cities  and  both  the  prose  encomia  (derived  from  Greek  literature),  and 
verse  encomia  (derived  from  Roman  literature),  run  parallel  in  the  encomia 
of  cities  written  in  the  Middle  Ages.^  It  was  reserved  for  humanist  writers  to 
cultivate  the  true  city  poem.  The  humanists  wrote  their  encomia  not  for  the 
ordinary  citizen  but  for  a  learned  circle  of  peers,  a  result,  perhaps,  of  the  mig- 
ratio  academica  pattern  of  many  humanists  as  well  as  of  their  concern  to  pro- 
pogate  and  revive  classical  learning  and  culture.  Hammer  shows  how  most 
city  encomia  deal  with  geographic  descriptions  and  loc2d  history,  display  an 
interest  in  etymology  of  place  names,  and  stress  economic  matters  of  a  city, 
its  customs,  its  popular  peculiarities,  as  well  as  the  character  of  the  inhabitants. 

The  classical  model  for  city  encomia  is  Mesmder's  taxonomy  of  epideictic 
genres.  Peri  epideiktikon,  which  includes  twenty-three  basic  topics  for  secular 
praise.  I  cite  only  a  few  examples.  When  praising  a  country,  you  should  dis- 
cuss its  situation  and  landscape,  and  he  specifies  six  aspects  of  nature  for  con- 
sideration; when  praising  a  city  topics  to  discuss  include  the  founder,  the 
inhabitants,  the  position  of  the  city  in  time,  changes  undergone,  and  reasons 
for  the  foundation.  Pursuits  or  characteristics  of  a  city  and  its  inhabitants  as 
well  as  public  life  should  be  covered;  each  topic  is  discussed  in  detail.  Parallels 
between  Meander's  suggestions  and  More's  description  of  Utopia  are  obvious. 
Even  a  cursory  glance  at  the  eight  sub-headings  More  provides  for  the  reader 


96  UTOPIA  AS  DIALOGUE  AND  CITY   ENCOMIUM 

in  Raphael's  account  of  Utopia  suggests  some  familiarity  with  the  received  tra- 
dition of  Meander's  taxonomy.  Here  is  what  Raphael  discusses: 

1.  The  Cities,  especially  Amaurotum  [the  capital] 

2.  The  Officials 

3.  Occupations 

4.  Social  Relations 

5.  Utopian  Travel  [Etc.] 

6.  Slaves  [Etc.] 

7.  Military  Affairs 

8.  Utopian  Religions 

Within  these  broad  categories,  marginal  glosses  direct  the  reader  to  more  de- 
tailed discussions  of  sub-divisions  within  the  topic.  Meander's  definition  of  the 
form  was  mediated,  of  course,  by  other  rhetoricians  and  writers  of  encomia 
betweeen  the  third  and  the  sixteenth  century;  yet  these  types  and  formulae 
become  standard  topics  for  the  genre.'' 

In  Utopia  More  exploits  the  artistic  aspects  of  the  dialogue  form  for  the  first 
time;  later  in  his  life  he  will  use  dialogue  for  religious  polemic  and  spiritual 
comfort.  The  variations  of  the  dialogue  contribute  to  the  Utopia's  complexity, 
its  wit,  and  its  humanistic  nature.  Raphael's  praise  of  Utopian  life  and  culture 
owes  its  form  to  traditional  encomia  of  cities  and  countries  popular  among 
sixteenth-century  humanists.  By  integrating  elements  of  these  genres  into  the 
structure  of  Utopia,  More  draws  deeply  from  the  humanist's  well  of  classical 
learning.  This  brief  exploration  of  genre  may  help  to  place  the  Utopia  within 
a  broader  humanistic  context  which  includes  those  internation2il  literary  and 
cultural  cross-currents  that  helped  to  shape  and  eventually  to  define  Renais- 
sance humanism. 

University  of  Wisconsin,  Parkside 


Notes 


1.  On  the  use  of  dialogue  see  David  M.  Bevington,  "The  Dialogue  in  Utopia:  Two 
sides  to  the  Question,"  Studies  in  Philology  58  (1961):  496-509;  R.  J.  Schoeck,  "  'A  Nurs- 
ery of  Correct  and  Useful  Institutions':  On  Reading  More's  Utopia  as  Dialogue,"  Afor- 
eana  22  (1969):  19-32;  Roger  L.  Deakins,  "The  Tudor  Dialogue  as  a  Literary  Form," 
(Ph.D.  diss.,  Harvard  University,  1964);  Andrew  McLean,  "Early  Tudor  Prose  Di- 
alogues: A  Study  in  Literary  Form,"  (Ph.D.  diss..  University  of  North  Carolina,  1971); 
David  Marsh,  The  Quattrocento  Dialogue.  Classsical  Tradition  and  Humanist  Invention  (Cam- 
bridge: Harvard  University  Press,  1980)  and  K.  J.  Wilson,  Incomplete  Fictions:  The  For- 
mation of  English  Renaissance  Dialogue  (Washington,  D.C. :  Catholic  University  of  America 


ANDREW  M.    MCLEAN 


97 


Press,  1985).  More's  rhetoric  is  discussed  by  A.  F.  Kinney,  Rhetoric  and  Poetic  in  Thomas 
More's  Utopia  (Malibu:  Undena,  1979)  and  Elizabeth  McCutcheon,  My  Dear  Peter.  The 
'Ars  Poetica'  and  Hermeneutics  for  More's  Utopia  (Angers:  Moreana,  1983).  On  the  com- 
position of  the  Utopia  see  Utopia,  eds.  Edward  Surtz  and  J.  H.  Hexter.  Yale  Edition 
of  the  Works  of  St.  Thomas  More,  (New  Haven:  Yale  University  Press,  1965),  4: 
xv-xxiii,  and  L'Utopia  (Paris:  Mame,  1978),  ed.  A.  Prevost,  pp.  61-82,  who  argues 
for  a  six  year  gestation  period  following  the  summer  of  1509. 

2.  Craig  Thompson,  ed.,  Translations  of  Lucian  Yale  Edition  of  the  Complete  Works 
of  St.  Thomas  More,  vol.  3,  part  1.  (New  Haven:  Yale  University  Press,  1974),  p.  xxxv. 

3.  At  least  four  autobiographical  passages  occur  in  Book  2.  We  learn  that  the  speaker 
lived  five  years  in  the  capital  city,  Amaurotum  (117),  2ind  that  he  prefers  Greek  to  Latin 
authors  (181).  He  is  a  world  traveler,  one  of  six  Europeans  in  Utopia  (219),  a  Christian 
(217),  and  a  considerate  teacher  (181).  He  knows  about  Aldine  type  (183),  mentions 
Europe  and  popes  (197),  and  ardently  admires  the  Utopian  system  although  not  com- 
pletely pleased  with  their  epicureanism  (161).  We  learn  all  these  facts  before  the  per- 
oration which  was  added  by  More  in  England.  In  the  peroration  and  conclusion  three 
facts  are  added:  the  speaker's  name  (245),  that  he  is  quick  to  censure  his  critics  (245), 
and  that  he  has  not  fully  convinced  the  author  of  the  merits  of  Utopia  (245,  247). 

4.  A.  R.  Heiserman,  "Satire  in  the  Utopia,""  PMLA  78  (1960):  168. 

5.  P.  S.  Allen,  ed.  Erasmus's  Opus  epistolarum  (Oxford,  1906-1958),  II.  415.  See  also 
J.  T.  Sheppard,  Richard  Croke  (Cambridge,  1919).  On  Buschius  see  E.  Bocking,  Hutten 
Opera.  Supplementum  II. 2  (Leipzig,  1870):  330-33;  on  Celtis,  A.  Werminghoff,  Conrad 
Celtis  und  sein  Buch  ilber  Numberg  (Freiburg,  1921)  and  L.  W.  Spitz,  Conrad  Celtis  (Cam- 
bridge, 1957).  The  correspondence  is  found  in  E.  Rogers,  ed.,  Correspondence  of  Sir  Tho- 
mas More  {Frinceton,  1947),  epistles  81,  162,  164-66. 

6.  W.  Hammer,  "Latin  and  German  Encomia  of  Cities,"  (Ph.D.  diss..  University 
of  Chicago,  1937)  is  still  the  most  comprehensive  study  in  English.  See  also  J.  K.  Hyde, 
"Medieval  Descriptions  of  Cities,"  Bulletin  of  the  John  Rylands  Library  48  (1965):  308-40; 
C.J.  Classen,  Die  Stadt  im  Spiegel  der  Descriptiones  und  Laudes  urbium  in  der  antiken  und  mit- 
telalterlichen  literatur  bis  zum  Ende  des  zwolften  Jahrhunderts  (Hildesheim  and  N.Y.:  Olms, 
1980)  and  P.  G.  Schmidt,  "Mittelalterischer  und  humanistisches  Stadtelob,"  in  Die  Re- 
zeption  der  Antike,  ed.  August  Buck  (Hamburg:  Hauswedell,  1981),  pp.  119-28. 

7 .  Meander's  classifications  of  epideictic  types  from  Peri  Epideiktikon  are  summarized 
in  Thomas  C.  Burgess,  Epideictic  Literature  {Chicago,  1902),  pp.  110-11,  174,  and  listed 
in  the  Appendix  to  O.  B.  Hardison,  Jr.,  The  Enduring  Monument:  A  Study  of  the  Idea  of 
Praise  in  Renaissance  Literary  Theory  and  Practice  (Chapel  Hill:  University  of  North  Car- 
olina Press,  1962),  pp.  195-98.  The  veduta  or  pictorial  representation  of  a  city  is  a  sub- 
genre  that  runs  parallel  to  the  city  poem  and  may  have  some  bearing  on  the  woodcut 
maps  of  Utopia  in  the  Louvain  (1516)  and  Paris  (1518)  editions.  The  latter  by  Am- 
brosius  Holbein  offers  more  architectural  and  typographical  details.  It  should  be  noted 
that  both  Erasmus  and  More  wrote  epigrams  to  accompany  paintings. 


The  Lectionum  Antiquarum 

of  Ludovicus  Caelius 

and  the  ItaUan  Mythographers 

John  Mulryan 

Ludovicus  Caelius  Rhodiginus,  who  lived  from  1453  to  1525,  and  whose 
given  name  was  Lodivico  Celio  Rodigino,  studied  philosophy  in  Fer- 
rarra  and  law  in  Padua.  He  occupied  various  professorships  in  Ve- 
nice and  in  Padua,  and  a  fmal  professorship,  under  the  patronage  of  Francis 
I,  in  Milan,  as  Professor  of  Greek.  He  began  his  publishing  career  with  notes 
on  Livy,  Servius,  Ovid,  Vergil,  and  Cicero,  but  his  crowning  achievement  was 
the  massive  Lectionum  Antiquarum,  or  "Thirty  Books  of  Ancient  Readings"  in 
the  posthumous  editions.  ^  This  series  of  random  observations  on  matters  clas- 
sical, as  derived  from  readings  of  the  classical  authors  themselves,  covers  al- 
most every  subject  that  might  conceivably  be  of  interest  to  a  Renaissance  student 
of  myth:  statuary  or  iconography,  numerology  and  the  occult,  the  allegoricsd 
tradition,  the  sacrifices  of  the  ancients,  the  temples  in  which  they  worshiped 
and  to  which  they  dedicated  their  gods,  the  characters  of  individual  gods  and 
goddesses,  the  wisdom  of  the  Egyptians,  the  feminine  mystique  (as  viewed 
through  myth),  etymology,  grammar,  geography  (the  entire  nineteenth  book), 
the  cosmos,  monotheism,  polytheism,  philosophy,  literary  genres,  dreams,  feast- 
ing, drunkenness,  marriage. 

Since  neither  Caelius  nor  his  masterwork  is  well  known,  it  might  be  worth- 
while to  provide  a  brief  summary  of  the  contents  of  the  last  edition  of  the  Lec- 
tionum Antiquarum,  which  was  published  in  Frankfort  [?]  in  1599.^ 

It  is  divided,  as  previously  stated,  into  thirty  books,  which  are  in  turn  sub- 
divided into  chapters.  According  to  the  introduction,  the  readings  somehow 
bear  out  the  Platonic  (or  Neoplatonic)  philosophy  that  the  world  is  full  of  sha- 
dows and  spectres.  Many  ancient  thinkers  are  discussed  throughout  the  work, 
and,  what  is  important  for  the  purpose  here,  classical  myth  is  often  invoked 
to  make  a  particular  point.  However,  like  many  Renaissance  texts,  the  Lec- 
tionum Antiquarum  does  not  appear  to  possess  a  coherent  organizational  scheme. 
It  begins,  logically  enough,  with  a  book  devoted  to  three  crucial  subjects:  God, 
the  world,  and  human  nature.  The  second  book  deals  exclusively  with  angels 


100  CAELIUS  AND  THE  ITALIAN   MYTHOGRAPHERS 

and  demons,  and  the  third  and  fourth  with  the  intellect.  After  that,  the  or- 
ganization of  the  work  breaks  down.  The  fifth  book  covers  dancing,  music, 
and  harmony  of  various  sorts  (no  doubt  to  be  associated  with  the  harmony 
of  the  universe),  and  the  sixth  with  sleep,  snakes,  disease,  etc.  The  seventh 
book  unaccountably  switches  to  poets  and  poetry,  but  it  is  at  this  point  in  the 
Lectionum  Antiquarum  that  myth  is  introduced  in  a  detailed  way,  particularly 
the  question  of  why  the  theologians  of  the  past  used  classical  myth  and  alle- 
gory, as  in  the  following  sentence:  "Poeticus  laus  poetarum  apologia  adversus 
Eratosthenem:  cur  etiam  theologia  vetus  fabulas  admiserit:  Virgilianae  ^^neidos 
sensus  allegoricus  explicatur"  (7:1).  The  rites  of  Bacchus  and  Dionysus  are  also 
discussed.  The  eighth  book  is  on  places,  the  ninth  on  music  and  morals,  the 
tenth  on  numerology  and  the  occult  (of  particular  importance  is  the  third 
chapter,  which  treats  the  statues  of  gods).  The  eleventh  book  contrasts  the  ac- 
tive and  contemplative  modes  of  existence;  the  twelfth  analyzes  the  sacrifices 
of  the  ancients,  the  thirteenth  the  temples  of  Juno,  the  fourteenth  celebrated 
women,  and  the  fifteenth  Vesta  and  the  hermaphrodite.  The  sixteenth  covers 
Egyptian  wisdom,  the  seventeenth  the  madness  brought  on  by  vice,  the  eight- 
eenth etymology,  the  nineteenth  the  places  of  the  ancient  world.  The  twen- 
tieth book  discusses  light  as  a  vehicle  of  celestial  virtue,  and  the  nature  of  the 
imagination  or  phantasy.  The  twenty-first  book,  in  which  Aulus  Gellius  is  fre- 
quently cited,  covers  the  natural  order  of  things,  2ind  in  the  twenty-second  book, 
monotheism  is  demonstrated  to  be  superior  to  polytheism,  and  various  nu- 
merological  patterns  are  viewed  as  part  of  God's  grand  design.  The  twenty- 
third  book  deals  extensively  with  love  (amor)  and  the  various  temples  of  the 
gods,  and  the  twenty-fourth  with  the  sun.  A  new  concern  emerges  in  the 
twenty-fifth  book:  adages.  The  twenty-sixth  book  covers  ships  and  the  sea,  the 
twenty-seventh  the  heavens  and  the  waters,  the  twenty-eighth  various  drink- 
ing customs  and  marital  rites.  The  twenty-ninth  book  is  on  epigrams,  pro- 
verbs, swearing,  oaths,  and  lainguage  generally,  and  the  thirtieth  discusses  the 
wisdom  contained  in  proverbs.  In  short,  Caelius,  in  his  thirty  books  of  ancient 
readings,  has  written  a  kind  of  clumsy  commonplace  book  or  a  poorly  organ- 
ized encyclopedia.  Nonetheless,  this  undigested  mass  of  erudition  was  "one 
of  [Ben]  Jonson's  authorities  on  archaeology,"^  and  one  of  the  last  authorities 
used  by  Francois  Rabelais  in  completing  his  Gargantua  et  Pantagruel.^ 

While  Caelius  was  no  doubt  known  to  the  mythographers  (our  subject  for 
today),  including  Vincenzo  Cartari,  Natale  Conti,  Georgius  Pictor,  and  Lilio 
Gregorio  Giraldi,  his  unsystematic  method  of  organizing  his  material  makes 
it  difficult  to  trace  his  impact  on  their  works.  Pictor,  in  his  Theologia  Mytho- 
logica  (Antwerp,  1532),^  makes  extensive  use  of  Caelius,  which  he  acknow- 
ledges in  individual  statements,  and  in  his  list  of  sources  under  the  category 
"ex  mixtis"  or  individual  authors  writing  on  general  topics  (lb).  Caelius's  range 
of  interest  is  remarkably  parallel  to  those  of  Giraldi  in  his  Historia  (1548),  Car- 
tari in  his  Imagini  (1556),  and  Conti  in  his  Mythologiae  (1568).^  Like  Giraldi, 


JOHN  MULRYAN  lOI 

he  is  profoundly  interested  in  etymology  (an  interest  that  is  shared  by  Pictor), 
like  Cartari  in  images  of  the  gods,  and  like  Conti  in  the  ethical  meanings  im- 
bedded in  the  legends  of  the  pagan  deities. 

Clearly,  of  all  the  mythographers,  the  one  who  makes  the  most  extensive 
and  profitable  use  of  Caelius's  Lectionum  Antiquarum  is  Georgius  Pictor,  in  his 
Theologia  Mythologica  (and  to  a  lesser  extent  in  his  later  work,  the  Apotheseos). 
In  fact  the  very  last  words  of  the  Theologia  Mythologica  are  "sic  Coelius"  (63a), 
Caelius  is  cited  on  iconographical  points,  like  the  statues  of  Diana  and  Venus, 
as  commentary,  as  a  marginal  note,  as  an  etymological  and  as  a  historical 
source,  and  as  a  definitive  source  summarizing  the  contents  of  other  sources, 
e.g.,  "Vide  Ludov.  Coel.  lib.  6";  "haec  Coelius  lib.  16"  (18b,  16b).  He  is  never 
cited  negatively,  and  is  perhaps  the  second  modern  source,  after  Erasmus,  that 
Pictor  cites.  The  chapter  on  Venus  may  be  taken  as  typical.  On  Venus's  liason 
with  Mars,  Caelius  is  cited  as  the  last  in  a  selected  list  of  sources.  I  quote  in 
English: 

Yet  those  who  say  that  Venus  slept  with  Mars  have  fabled  nothing  that 
was  in  any  way  absurd;  for  as  Macrobius  says,  those  of  martial  stripe 
exert  themselves  to  obtain  carnal  union,  whether  with  a  man  or  a  woman. 
And  the  Platonists  even  add  the  following:  the  irascible  and  concupis- 
cible  appetites  are  almost,  as  it  were,  of  the  same  kindred.  For  those  who 
are  drawn  to  lust  are  also  rather  prone  to  anger;  conversely,  the  angry 
are  also  given  to  lust.  We  find  this  in  Coelius.  (18a-b) 

On  Venus  Dexicreon,  Pictor  has  this  to  say:  "After  that  a  statue  of  silver  was 
erected  and  Dexicreon  called  it  after  his  own  name,  as  Coelius  has  reported, 
book  16"  (16b).  And  Caelius  is  also  used  to  support  an  etymological  point  on 
Venus  Philomedea:  "Venus  was  sometimes  called  Philomedea  because  she  was 
born  from  the  genitals  of  Uranus,  which  they  call  Medea  according  to  the  tes- 
timony of  Coelius  (16:18).  Hence  she  is  also  called  Aphrodite"  (16b).  And  in 
the  chapter  on  Mercury,  after  a  long  list  of  the  god's  attributes  is  provided, 
there  is  a  summary  statement  attributing  the  list  to  Caelius,  and  comparing 
his  testimony  with  that  of  a  venerable  source  from  antiquity:  "Coelius  points 
out  these  things  (2:50);  and  you  will  also  find  in  Coelius  that  it  was  customary 
to  send  the  shield  and  the  caduceus,  to  embrace  either  war  or  peace.  And  Aulus 
Gellius  makes  the  same  point  (11:27)"  (20a).  The  reference  to  Aulus  Gellius 
was  also  cribbed  from  Caelius. 

A  more  scholarly  approach  to  etymology  is  found  in  a  work  that  was  in- 
fluenced by  Pictor,  the  De  cognominibus  deorum  (Basel,  1543),  by  Julianus  Au- 
relius,  i.e.,  J.  A.  Haurech.  Aurelius,  while  he  owes  much  to  Pictor,  is  a  great 
deal  more  learned,  and  it  is  a  tribute  to  Caelius  that  he  is  among  the  sources 
mentioned  by  this  learned  etymologist. 

The  next  great  figure  in  the  mythographic  tradition  is,  of  course,  Lilio  Greg- 
orio  Giraldi,  whose  Historia  de  deis  gentium  (1548)  is  considered  by  Don  Cam- 


102  CAELIUS  AND  THE  ITALIAN   MYTHOGRAPHERS 

eron  Allen  (Mysteriously  Meant,  1970)  to  be  the  first  scholarly  mythography.^ 
Giraldi  seldom  mentions  a  modern  source  and  then  he  usually  does  it  in  a  dis- 
paraging manner,  but  for  him  Caelius  is  "our  Caelius."  Since  Giraldi  presents 
a  basically  etymological  approach  to  the  Greek  and  Roman  divinities,  derived 
from  historical  research,  and  eschew^s  allegorical  interpretations,  the  factual, 
objective  emphasis  of  Caelius  no  doubt  appealed  to  him.  For  example,  he  cites 
"our  Caelius"  as  his  source  for  the  information  that  the  earth  was  for  the  an- 
cients a  presiding  deity,  who  repaired  and  reconstituted  things  that  had  worn 
out.  He  also  looks  to  Caelius  for  iconographical  interpretations,  including  num- 
ismatics, as  in  the  following  quotation: 

I  saw  on  an  old  imperial  coin  of  Numerianus,  on  the  back,  the  inscrip- 
tion to  Venus  Victrix.  There  was  a  figure  in  a  woman's  garment,  which 
had  a  small  Victory  in  her  right  hand,  and  something  in  the  left  which 
our  Caelius  took  to  be  in  the  shape  of  a  navel.  That  image  was  assoc- 
iated with  her  worship  in  Paphos,  according  to  Tacitus,  as  I  pointed  out 
earlier.  I  thought  that  it  was  a  mirror,  and  I  also  talked  about  the  mirror 
earlier  in  this  work.  (548-49) 

We  now  come  to  those  mythographers  who  chose  to  make  use  of  Caelius 
but  not  to  acknowledge  that  use  in  any  way,  Vincenzo  Cartari  and  Natale  Conti. 
Cartari's  Imagini,  published  for  the  first  time  in  Italian  in  1556,  and  translated 
into  French,  Latin,  German,  and  (in  severely  abridged  form)  English  there- 
after, is  basically  an  iconographical  study  of  the  gods,  while  Conti's  Mythol- 
ogiae  (1568),  the  most  popular  mythography  of  the  Renaissance  (translated  into 
seventeenth-century  French  by  Jean  de  Montlyard),  has  a  distinctly  ethical  bias. 

Cartari's  use  of  Caelius  is  indirect  —  through  his  direct  but  unacknowledged 
borrowings  from  Giraldi.  If  we  compare  the  passage  just  quoted  from  Giraldi 
with  the  following  passage  from  Cartari,  it  will  be  obvious  that  they  are  almost 
identical: 

The  Romans  made  Venus  the  Victorious  as  follows,  as  one  can  see  in 
a  medal  of  the  Emperor  Numerianus.  They  painted  (or  rather  carved) 
a  very  beautiful  woman  with  a  long  gown  that  trailed  to  the  ground.  She 
proferred  a  small  image  of  Victory  with  her  right  hand;  and  in  her  left 
hand  she  had  something  that  looked  like  this  [here  Cartari  depicts  a  cir- 
cle above  a  triangle,  what  Caelius  suggested  was  a  navel].  Some  would 
have  it  that  that  represented  the  image  that  the  Paphians  adored  under 
the  name  of  Venus,  as  I  have  already  mentioned.  Others  have  maintained 
that  it  is  much  more  likely  to  be  a  mirror.  .  ,  .  (545) 

Thus  Cartari  takes  over,  detail  for  detail,  the  sketch  of  Venus  the  Victorious 
from  Giraldi,  but  suppresses  the  reference  to  Caelius,  which  he  must  at  least 
have  read. 

I  now  offer  for  your  inspection  four  passages  from  Caelius,  Pictor,  Cartari, 


JOHN   MULRYAN  IO3 

and  Giraldi,  which  present  essentially  the  same  iconographical  interpretation 
of  the  statue  of  Venus  pressing  down  a  snail  or  tortoise  with  her  foot.  (We 
shall,  for  the  sake  of  consistency,  translate  testudo  as  tortoise): 

Testudinem  non  modo  numismatum  fuisse  notam,  quod  paulo  ante 
astruebamus:  verum  etiam  secreti  ac  silenti  symbolum,  ex  veteri  nobis 
lectione,  tanquam  cella  quadam  proma  affatim  suggeritur.  Hoc  enim  ar- 
gumento  Heliensibus  Phidias  Venerem  fecit,  quae  testudinem  calcaret, 
opertius  implicatiusque  commonstrans:  esse  muliebris  decoris,  aedes  cus- 
todire  ac  silentium.  Vxorium  quippe  ornamentum  est,  aut  cum  mariot 
aut  per  maritum  loqui.  (Lectionum  Antiquarum,  435-36). 

Testudo  sub  pede  est  silentii  symbolon,  commonstrans  muliebris  esse  or- 
natus  taciturnitatem:  uxorium  quippe  decus  est,  aut  cum  marito  (inquit 
Eras.)  aut  per  maritum  loqui.  (Theologia  Mythologica,  18b). 

.  .  .  Phidia  fece  gia  a  gli  Elei  una  Venere,  che  stava  con  un  pie  sopra 
una  testuggine,  per  mostrare  alle  donne,  he  toccaua  loro  di  havere  la  cura 
della  casa,  e  di  ragionare  manco  che  fosse  possibile,  perche  in  una  donna 
il  tacere  e  giudicato  bellissima  cosa  .  .  .  ma  poi  che  sono  maritate  bi- 
sogna  che  habbiano  la  cura  del  governo  della  casa,  che  se  ne  stiano  chete, 
quasi  che  e  mariti  habbiano  da  parlare  per  loro.  Imperoche  scrive  Plinio 
che  la  testuggine  non  ha  lingua.  (Imagini,  540-41). 

Plutarchus  autem  in  Praeceptis  connubialibus  Venerem  scribit  testud- 
inem pede  calcantem  Eleis  Phidiam  effecisse,  ut  domesticae  custodiae  et 
silentii  mulieribus  symbolum  esset,  idem  Plutarchus  in  libro  De  Iside  et 
Osiride,  de  hac  Venere  agens,  ita  interpretatur:  quod  virgines  custodia 
indigeant,  nuptas  vero  quod  deceat  domus  gubernatio  et  silentium.  (His- 
toria,  532-33). 

In  each  of  these  passages  Venus,  representing  womanhood,  stands  on  the 
tortoise.  Since  the  tortoise  is  slow,  this  means  that  women  should  stay  at  home 
and  take  care  of  the  house,  which  is  their  proper  sphere.  Since  the  tortoise  is 
mute,  women  should  be  silent.  In  fact,  as  Caelius  points  out,  silence  is  the 
ornament  of  the  wife,  just  as  speech  is  the  ornament  of  the  husband.  Pictor 
takes  this  one  step  further,  as  does  Cartari  — the  wife  speciks  through  her  hus- 
band. Cartari  and  Giraldi  are  more  expansive  on  the  sources  of  the  interpre- 
tation, but  there  is  a  clear  hne  of  development  from  Caelius  to  Cartari. 

It  would  be  both  fitting  and  profoundly  satisfying  to  conclude  with  a  long 
quotation  from  Conti's  Mythologiae  that  would  synthesize  these  four  accounts 
of  Venus  standing  on  the  tortoise,  and  demonstrate  conclusively  Conti's  orig- 
inal debt  to  Caelius's  Lectionum  Antiquarum.  Alas,  the  wily  Italian  mythogra- 
pher  defeats  the  source  hunter.  Conti  is  just  innovative  enough  in  his  methods 
to  destroy  the  symmetry  of  my  example.  He  is  the  only  major  mythographer 


104 


CAELIUS  AND  THE  ITALIAN   MYTHOGRAPHERS 


who  omits  the  story  of  the  tortoise,  possibly  because  he  found  it  offensive  or 
too  obvious  for  serious  consideration.  His  parallels  with  Caelius  are  on  more 
substantive  points.  For  example,  both  Caelius  and  Conti  have  lengthy  chap- 
ters devoted  to  the  sacrifices  to  the  gods  and  burial  rites  of  the  dead  practiced 
by  the  ancients.  Both  wax  eloquent  on  the  heavenly  and  earthly  Venuses,  the 
origins  of  love,  and  its  immaterial  status  as  an  idea  in  the  Divine  Mind.  In 
fact  Conti  comes  closer  to  Caelius  in  his  interest  in  Platonic  speculation  about 
the  nature  of  love  and  beauty  than  any  of  the  other  mythographers.  More  spec- 
ifically, Caelius  and  Conti  almost  echo  each  other  (perhaps  because  both  are 
using  Augustine  and  the  Church  Fathers  as  source  material)  in  emphasizing 
the  ridiculousness  of  polytheism;  both  discuss  the  Doric,  Phrygian,  Lydian, 
and  Iconic  forms  of  music;  and  both  treat  in  detail  the  story  in  Lucian  of  the 
mocking  god  Momus  desiring  a  window  in  man's  body  so  that  one  could  look 
into  the  secrets  of  his  heart.  Thus,  while  it  is  almost  impossible  to  trace  any 
direct  influence  of  Caelius  on  Conti,  Caelius  was  definitely  the  source  for  many 
of  the  other  mythographers,  whom  Conti  doubtless  knew.  Conti  also  resem- 
bles Caelius  in  being  almost  unfailingly  precise  in  his  use  of  classical  sources. 
He  probably  found  some  use  for  the  erudition  of  Caelius,  although  he  was  cle- 
ver enough  to  cover  his  tracks.  What,  after  all,  are  we  to  say  of  a  man  who 
denies  having  any  contemporary  source  for  his  ideas,  as  Conti  does  in  the  fol- 
lowing passage  from  the  first  book  of  his  Mythologiae? :  "I  cannot  understand 
why  no  one,  from  ancient  times  to  the  present,  ever  undertook  fully  to  explain 
these  remarkable  myths"  (1:1). 

Thus  Caelius  forms  an  interesting  link  between  the  fourteenth-century  De 
Genealogia  of  Boccaccio^  and  the  Theologia  Mythologica  of  Georgius  Pictor.  His 
Lectiones  Antiquarum  was  not  used  so  frequently  as  the  more  popular  manuals 
of  Conti  and  Cartari,  but  there  was  no  stigma  attached  to  consulting  a  work 
of  such  admirable  erudition  (let  us  not  forget  that  Julius  Caesar  Scaliger  re- 
ferred to  Conti  as  "vir  futilissimus'').^^  Caelius  was  scholarly,  influential,  and 
respectable.  Like  most  of  the  authors  we  have  been  speaking  about  at  this  con- 
ference, he  deserves  to  be  better  known. 

St.  Bonaventure  University 


Notes 


1 .  This  biographical  and  bibliographical  sketch  is  drawn  from  two  sources:  Biograph- 
ical and  Bibliographical  Dictionary  of  the  Italian  Humanists  and  of  the  World  of  Classical  Scho- 
larship, 1300-1800,  ed.  Mario  Emilio  Cosenza,  vol.  4  (Boston:  G.  K.  Hall,  1962), 
"Rhodiginus."  Enciclopedia  Vniversal  Ilvstrada,  (Madrid:  Espasa-Calpe,  1907?-1930), 
51:418,  "Ricchieri." 


JOHN   MULRYAN  IO5 

2.  All  subsequent  references  to  Caelius's  Lectionum  are  to  this  edition,  and  will  be 
provided  in  the  text. 

3.  Noted  in  A  Benjonson  Companion,  ed.  D.  Heyward  Brock,  (Bloomington,  Ind.: 
Indiana  University  Press,  1983),  1:236. 

4.  See  A  History  of  Classical  Scholarship  From  the  Revival  of  Learning  to  the  End  of  the  Eight- 
eenth Century,  ed.  John  Edwin  Sandys,  (Cambridge:  Cambridge  University  Press,  1908), 
2:183. 

5.  All  subsequent  references  to  the  Theologia  Mythologica  are  to  this  edition,  and  will 
be  provided  in  the  text.  Translations  of  all  texts  are  my  own.  In  quotations  from  Pic- 
tor,  I  have  retained  the  Coelius  spelling  when  it  appears,  but  in  my  own  remarks  I  refer 
to  the  author  as  Caelius,  the  spelling  preferred  by  modern  scholars. 

6.  In  subsequent  references,  I  cite  the  editio princeps  of  Giraldi,  but,  because  the  texts 
were  substantially  revised  and  expanded  in  these  editions,  I  cite  the  Venice  1571  edi- 
tion of  Cartari  and  the  Frankfurt  1581  edition  of  Conti.  For  a  detailed  analysis  of  the 
editions  of  the  Renaissance  mythographers,  see  my  article:  "Translations  and  Adap- 
tations of  Vincenzo  Cartari's  Imagini  and  Natale  Conti's  Mythologiae:  the  Mythographic 
Tradition  in  the  Renaissance,"  Canadian  Review  of  Comparative  Literature ,  8  no.  2  (Spring, 
1981),  pp.  272-83. 

7.  Basel,  1558.  The  Apotheseos  is  illustrated,  and  in  dialogue  form.  Theophrastus  and 
Evander  comment  on  the  appearances  of  the  gods  in  the  accompanying  illustrations, 
and  an  iconographical  symbolism  develops  from  their  remarks. 

8.  Don  Cameron  Allen,  Mysteriously  Meant:  The  Rediscovery  of  Pagan  Symbolism  and  Al- 
legorical Interpretation  in  the  Renaissance  i^akunore:  the  John  Hopkins  Press,  1970),  p.  221. 

9.  For  Boccaccio's  Genealogy  of  the  Gods,  see  the  Genealogie  Deorum  Gentilium  Libri,  2 
vols.  (Bari:  Gius.  Laterza,  1951);  the  translation  of  the  last  two  books  by  Charles  V. 
Osgood  {Boccaccio  on  Poetry,  Indianapolis,  Bobbs-Merrill,  1956);  and  my  article,  "Venus, 
Cupid  and  the  Italian  Mythographers,"  Humanistica  Lovaniensia,  23  (1974):  31-41. 

10.  Epistolae,  14:  614.  Cited  in  Jean  Seznec,  The  Survival  of  the  Pagan  Gods:  The  Myth- 
ological Tradition  and  Its  Place  in  Renaissance  Humanism  and  Art,  trans.  Barbara  F.  Sessions 
series  38  (New  York:  Bollingen,  1953),  p.  232. 


Le  De  pictura  ueterum  de 

Franciscus  Junius: 

Le  Musee  Imaginaire  d'un  Philologue 

Colette  Nativel 


Franciscus  Junius,  I'auteur  du  De  pictura  ueterum,  connut  une  bien  in- 
grate  fortune  litteraire.  Apres  avoir  ete  lu,  admire,  pille  par  ses  con- 
temporains,  il  tomba  des  le  XVIIF  siecle  dans  un  oubli  injuste. 
Certes,  des  critiques  comme  Winckelmann  et  Lessing,  en  lui  portant  des  coups 
fatals,  ouvrirent  a  la  litterature  d'art  de  nouvelles  et  fecondes  perspectives, 
qui  expliquent  en  partie  cette  indifference,  mais  la  lecture  du  De  pictura  s'im- 
pose  encore  a  qui  veut  comprendre  I'esthetique  du  XVIP  siecle  et  ses  rap- 
ports avec  I'antiquite. 

Force  nous  est  de  rappeler  brievement  qui  fut  I'auteur  de  cet  ouvrage  si  im- 
portant que  sa  parution  en  1637  fut  saluee  dans  des  lettres  elogieuses  par  Van 
Dyck,  Rubens  et  Hugo  Grotius.^ 

Fils  du  celebre  theologien  d'origine  frangaise,  Frangois  Dujon,^  il  naquit 
en  1589  a  Heidelberg  ou  professait  son  pere  et  suivit  celui-ci  dans  ses  tri- 
bulations de  professeur  et  de  ministre  protestant  jusqu'a  Leyde  oii  il  fit  de 
solides  etudes,  sous  la  tutelle  de  son  beau-frere  Gerard  Vossius  et  de  son  oncle 
Franciscus  Gomarus.  Destine  a  la  theologie,  il  devint  ministre  grace  a  I'ap- 
pui  de  Grotius.  Mais  les  querelles  religieuses  qui  dechiraient  alors  la  Hollande 
lui  firent  choisir  I'exil  en  Angleterre.  Sa  culture  litteraire  et  philologique  lui 
permit  de  devenir  le  bibliothecaire  du  fameux  collectionneur  Thomas  How- 
ard of  Arundel  et  le  precepteur  de  son  plus  jeune  fils.  Apres  les  universites 
hollandaises,  il  decouvrait  la  cour  brillante  d'un  virtuoso.  Autour  du  Comte 
gravitaient  les  plus  celebres  humanistes  anglais:  citons,  entre  autres,  William 
Petty,  John  Selden  et  le  bibliothecaire  du  roi,  Patrice  Young— et  les  plus  grands 
artistes,  Wenceslaus  Hollar,  Inigo  Jones,  Van  Dyck  et  Rubens.^ 

C'est  a  la  demande  d'Arundel  que  Junius  entreprit  de  rediger  un  catalogue 
des  artistes  et  des  oeuvres  d'art  antiques:  I'introduction  dont  il  voulait  le  faire 
preceder  prit  de  telles  proportions  qu'elle  fut  publiee  en  un  volume  separe 
en  1637.  Le  succes  fut  immediat:  Junius  dut  traduire  le  De  pictura  ueterum  en 
anglais  pour  la  comtesse  d'Arundel,  en  1638,  puis  en  hollandais,  pour  satis- 


I08  DE  PICTURA  UETERUM  DE  FRANCISCUS  JUNIUS 

faire  les  peintres,  en  1641 —traduction  qui  connut  deux  reeditions  en  1659 
et  1675.  II  ne  cessa  d'enrichir  sa  premiere  edition  latine,  si  bien  que  I'erudit 
hoUandais  Georges  Graevius  en  fit  paraitre  une  seconde,  posthume,  en  1694, 
conjointe  a  celle  du  Catalogus  artificum  encore  inedit  et  qui  devait  lui  aussi  ins- 
pirer  bien  des  travaux  ulterieurs."^ 

Ces  deux  ouvrages  furent  les  seules  contributions  de  Junius  a  la  litterature 
d'art,  puisque,  specialiste  des  langues  anglo-saxonnes,  il  fut  I'initiateur  d'un 
courant  d'etudes  philologiques  dont  Oxford  fut  le  centre.  II  mourut  en  1677, 
a  Windsor,  chez  son  neveu,  Thumaniste  Isaac  Vossius. 

Le  De  pictura  procede  de  la  double  personnalite  de  son  auteur,  si  j'ose  dire; 
il  temoigne,  en  effet  des  preoccupations  esthetiques  des  amateurs  anglais  du 
XVIF  siecle  et  propose  une  approche  de  I'art  antique  a  partir  des  textes. 

Les  collections  d'Arundel  et  celles  du  roi  avaient  introduit  en  Angleterre  I'art 
des  anciens.  Mais,  il  s'agissait  essentiellement  de  sculptures,  d'inscriptions  et 
de  monnaies.  Ecrire  un  traite  sur  la  peinture  antique  etait  done  une  gageure, 
d'autant  que  Junius  n'avait  pas  fait  le  voyage  en  Italic  oii  il  aurait  peut-etre 
pu  voir  quelques  fresques.  II  explique  dans  son  epitre  dedicatoire  au  roi 
Charles  1^"^  que,  n'en  pouvant  contempler  de  ses  yeux  les  chefs-d'oeuvre,  il  a 
entrepris  de  percevoir  par  I'esprit  ce  qu'elle  pouvait  etre.  De  plus,  les  anciens 
n'ont  pas  laisse  de  veritables  ouvrages  d'esthetique,  ni  d'arts  de  peindre,  ni 
meme  d'histoires  de  I'art  ou  de  la  peinture  telles  que  nous  les  concevons,  Pline 
ne  s'interessant  a  ces  questions  qu'au  detour  de  considerations  sur  les  metaux 
et  les  mineraux.  Ou  done  trouver  la  matiere  de  cette  etude?  Paradoxale- 
ment,  partout.  Junius  se  langa  dans  une  etonnante  compilation  et  recueillit 
tout  ce  qu'il  pouvait  trouver  sur  cet  art  pour  I'organiser  en  un  vaste  traite. 
Sa  bibliographic  qui  ne  compte  pas  moins  de  trois  cents  auteurs  couvre  toute 
I'Antiquite,  d'Homere  a  I'epoque  byzantine,  et  tous  les  domaines.  Traites 
d'eloquence,  arts  poetiques,  ouvrages  philosophiques,  livres  d'histoire,  dic- 
tionnaires,  commentaires,  scholies,  correspondances,.rien,  jusqu'au  manuelZ)^ 
re  militari  de  Vegece  ou  au  De  re  rustica  de  Columelle  n'echappa  a  sa  vigilante 
erudition.  II  releva  chaque  passage,  chaque  phrase,  chaque  expression  meme 
qui  concernait  la  peinture.  Bien  plus,  il  adapta  a  son  propos  toute  citation 
sur  I'art  en  substituant  au  mot  orator,  par  exemple,  celui  de  pictor,  pour  utiliser 
tel  extrait  de  Ciceron  ou  de  Quintilien.  Mais  ce  procede  ne  s'expUque  pas 
par  la  seule  carence  de  vestiges:  il  repose  sur  une  theorie  de  I'art  qui  trouve 
justement  sa  source  dans  I'antiquite. 

A  la  fm  du  livre  III,  dans  sa  conclusion,  il  repond  a  d'eventuels  detrac- 
teurs:  Quisquis  autem  operant  nostram  eleuari  posse  putabit  quod  nonnulla  Tullii,  Ho- 
ratii,  Quintiliani  uerba  mutatione  leuicula  ah  oratoria  etpoetica  arte  adpicturam  deflexerim, 
nae  ille profecto  parum  intelligens  adfinitatis  illius  quae  artes  has  mutuo  sibi  alligauit  (Celui 
qui  pensera  pouvoir  denigrer  notre  travail  sous  pretexte  que  nous  avons  fait 
subir  quelques  legeres  modifications  de  vocabulaire  a  plusieurs  passages  de 
Tullius,  d'Horace  ou  de  Quintilien  pour  les  transposer  des  arts  poetiques  et 


COLETTE   NATIVEL  IO9 

oratoires  a  la  peinture,  c'est  qu'il  a  mal  compris  la  parente  qui  unissait  entre 
eux  ces  arts).  L'idee,  certes,  n'etait  pas  nouvelle:  le  parallele  entre  peinture 
et  poesie  avait  connu  bien  des  developpements  depuis  la  celebre  formule  de 
Simonide  rapportee  par  Plutarque  dans  les  Moralia,  346f-347a  que  Junius  tra- 
duit:  Picturam  esse  poesin  tacentem,  poesin  uero  picturam  loquentem.  La  serie  d'ex- 
emples  qu'il  propose  pour  I'illustrer,  au  §.11  du  chapitre  4,  se  trouvait  deja 
au  §.2  du  Z)^  sculptura  de  Pomponius  Gauricus.^  Le  Napolitain,  que  Junius 
avait  lu  (6),  avait,  avant  lui,  tire  parti  de  I'amphibologie  des  verbes  Ypd9etv 
et  scribere  qui  signifient  a  la  fois  ecrire  et  dessiner,  de  celle  de  legere  employe 
par  Virgile  au  vers  34  du  chant  6  de  YEneide  pour  designer  I'acte  de  contem- 
pler  un  tableau;  il  avait  remarque  aussi  le  caractere  ambigu  des  hieroglyphes 
en  notant  qu'ils  etaient  a  la  fois  peints  et  sculptes;  Junius  relevant,  quant  a 
lui,  qu'ils  sont  une  "ecriture  peinte" picturata  scriptio.  Mais  notre  auteur  ne  s'est 
pas  contente  d'enumerer  ces  arguments  classiques:  citant  au  debut  de  son 
parallele  un  passage  du  §.2  du  Pro  Archia,  il  les  inscrit  dans  une  demonstra- 
tion plus  solide.  Omnes  artes  quae  ad  humanitatem  pertinent,  habent  quoddam  commune 
uinculum  et  quasi  cognatione  inter  se  continentur  (Tous  les  arts  qui  concernent  I'hu- 
manite  ont  un  certain  lien  commun  et  sont  lies  entre  eux  par  une  sorte  de 
parente).  Ciceron,  lui-meme,  utilisait  des  exemples  pris  a  la  peinture  et  a 
la  sculpture  pour  illustrer  ses  theses  sur  I'eloquence;  Junius  les  reprend,  mais 
il  s'appuie  aussi  sur  des  exemples  empruntes  a  I'art  oratoire  pour  etayer  sa 
theorie  de  I'art.  Le  centon  de  citations  qu'il  assemble  n'est  pas  un  simple  jeu 
d'erudit:  il  est  justifie  par  cette  unite  entre  les  arts.  Plus  que  d'exemples,  d'ail- 
leurs,  c'est  I'emploi  d'un  langage  commun  a  tous  les  arts  qu'autorise  cette  pa- 
rente. M.  Alain  Michel  a  souvent  montre,  et  recemment  encore  dans  La  parole 
et  la  beaute,  comment,  grace  a  Ciceron,  le  vocabulaire  de  la  rhetorique  a  per- 
mis  de  tout  dire  sur  les  arts  et  sur  la  beaute.  Nous  en  avons  ici  une  preuve 
eclatante. 

Enfm,  si  tous  les  arts  sont  freres,  c'est  que  chacun,  par  ses  propres  voies, 
est  une  approche  de  la  beaute  et  une  reponse  aux  grands  problemes  de  I'esthe- 
tique.  Nous  voudrions  maintenant  montrer  comment  le  De  pictura  aborde  ces 
problemes  dans  le  livre  L  Nous  avons  choisi  de  nous  limiter  a  ce  premier  livre, 
parce  qu'il  etait  impossible  de  presenter  integralement  une  si  volumineuse 
somme,  mais  aussi  parce  que  Junius,  suivant  dans  son  ouvrage  le  plan  tra- 
ditionnel  ars/artifex/opus  y  reconstitue  une  esthetique  coherente  a  partir  de  trois 
grands  themes  de  reflexion:  I'imitation,  I'imagination,  I'education. 

La  theorie  de  I'imitation  occupe  une  place  fondamentaile:  Junius  en  distingue 
deux  sortes  au  §.3  du  chapitre  L  Voici  la  traduction  de  ce  passage  un  peu 
long^  "Sans  doute  est-il  difficile  de  conserver  vivantes  dans  son  esprit  certaines 
images  d'objets  animes  et  inanimes,  mais  ce  Test  plus  encore  de  reproduire 
une  replique  indiscernable  de  ces  memes  images;  surtout  si  I'artiste,  non  con- 
tent de  s'attacher  a  reproduire  fidelement  les  oeuvres  singulieres  de  la  na- 
ture, imprime  dans  son  esprit,  apres  avoir  attentivement  examine  les  corps 


no  DE  PICTURA  UETERUM   DE  FRANCISCUS  JUNIUS 

les  plus  beaux,  un  modele  parfait  et,  en  s'y  conformant  comme  au  canon  ab- 
solument  sans  defauts  de  Polyclete,  trace  des  images  d'une  admirable  beaute." 
Limitation  qu'il  prone  n'est  done  pas  la  reproduction  servile  d'une  nature  neces- 
sairement  imparfaite,  mais  celle  d'un  modele  ideal,  compose  par  I'esprit  a 
partir  des  elements  naturels  les  plus  beaux.  On  reconnait  la  la  these  du  livre 
2  du  De  inuentione  et  Junius  ne  manque  pas  de  rapporter  la  belle  anecdote  de 
Zeuxis  a  Crotone  que  Ciceron  utilisait  dans  ce  traite  d'eloquence.  Devant 
donner  I'image  de  la  beaute  la  plus  achevee,  le  peintre  avait  pris  aux  cinq 
plus  belles  jeunes  fiUes  de  Crotone  ce  que  chacune  avait  de  plus  beau  et  avait 
reuni  ces  beautes  eparses  en  un  tout  harmonieux.  La  beaute  est  complexe: 
elle  ne  se  trouve  pas  a  I'etat  brut  dans  la  nature,  mais  elle  se  nourrit  de  celle- 
ci:  I'art  depasse  la  nature  parce  qu'il  procede  de  I'idee. 

Le  chapitre  II  rattache  cette  these  essentielle  a  sa  source  neo-platonicienne. 
Certes  Platon  ne  pensait  pas  que  I'art  put  atteindre  I'idee  et  semble  avoir 
eprouve  une  grande  mefiance  a  I'egard  des  artistes  et  de  leurs  productions. 
Pourtant,  les  philosophes  neo-platoniciens  donnerent  aux  theses  du  Sophiste 
et  du  Timee  une  interpretation  qui  rehabilitait  un  art  fonde  sur  la  notion  de 
beau  ideal.  C'est  cette  tradition  que  suit  Junius  en  citant,  en  particulier,  ce 
passage  capital  du  Commentaire  sur  le  Timee  de  Platon  de  Proclus  (II,  81c):  to 
7rp6(;  TO  vorjTOV  yeyovo;  xaXov  Igti,  to  Tipo?  to  yevriTOV  -j'£yov6(;,  ou  xaXov 
eaTiv.  (Ce  qui  est  fait  d'apres  une  conception  de  I'esprit  est  beau.  Ce  qui  est 
fait  d'apres  un  modele  deja  existant  n'est  pas  beau).  II  le  juxtapose  a  une 
longue  citation  de  Ciceron,  Orator,  7-9.  Faut-il  rappeler  un  texte  aussi  connu 
et  dont  Panofsky  a  montre  le  role  determinant  dans  I'histoire  de  I'esthetique? 
Disons  seulement  qu'abordant  son  traite  sur  VOptimus  Orator,  Ciceron  prenait 
pour  exemple  le  Perfectus  Artifex,  Phidias;  qu'il  s'interrogeait  sur  la  theorie  pla- 
tonicienne  des  Idees  en  se  demandant,  sans  trancher  la  question,  s'il  existait 
un  modele  exterieur  a  la  conscience  de  I'artiste,  different  du  modele  inte- 
rieur  auquel  il  se  conformait  pour  realiser  son  oeuvre.  Junius  a  bien  vu  — et 
Panofsky  lui  en  est  a  mon  avis  redevable^  —  que  I'Arpinate  etait  a  I'origine 
de  cet  inflechissement  decisif  du  concept  platonicien  d'Idee.  II  a  egalement 
compris  I'importance  de  cette  theorie,  dont  il  fait  le  centre  de  sa  pensee,  dans 
I'histoire  de  la  beaute. 

Cette  imitation  du  beau  ideal  s'appuie  sur  I'imagination.  Dans  ce  meme 
chapitre  2,  Junius,  suivant  la  distinction  platonicienne  du  Sophiste  235b-236c, 
si  souvent  utilisee  a  la  Renaissance,  en  defmit  deux  sortes:  une  imagination 
eixaaTiXT),  celle  qui  copie  ce  que  Ton  voit  et  qui  est  reussie  si  elle  respecte  la 
oufXfxeTpia  du  modele  et  y  adjoint  les  couleurs  adequates.  L'autre,  ^avTaaTixT), 
qui  est  I'art  de  copier  des  conceptions  de  I'esprit.  C'est  a  cette  derniere,  dont 
on  voit  le  lien  avec  la  notion  de  beau  ideal,  qu'il  accorde  bien  sur  le  plus  de 
valeur. 

Mais,  la  encore,  Junius  expose  la  pensee  antique  dans  sa  complexite  et 
la  theorie  de  la  representation  qu'il  developpe  est  empruntee  a  Aristote.  Le 


COLETTE   NATIVEL  HI 

Stagirite  avait  elabore,  en  particulier  dans  son  traite  De  Fame  dont  Junius 
cite  plusieurs  commentaires,  une  psychologie  fondee  sur  une  hierarchie  des 
fonctions.  Ainsi,  pour  lui,  a  la  difference  de  Platon,  la  sensibilite  et  I'ima- 
gination  n'etaient  plus  des  obstacles  a  la  connaissance  intellectuelle:  entre  les 
sens  et  I'intellect,  le  sens  commun  et  I'imagination  permettaient  de  passer  de 
la  sensation  a  la  notion,  du  particulier  au  general.  S'appuyant  sur  Themis- 
tios  et  Alexandre  d'Aphrodise,  Junius  montre  les  interpretations  ulterieures 
de  cette  these  jusqu'au  recent  De  causis  de  Scaliger  (50,  66).  Enfin,  il  la  relie 
de  fagon  suggestive  a  I'image  stoicienne  de  la  cire:  "Les  Stoiciens  — il  cite 
Diogene-Laerce,  Zenon,  7,  45  — disent  que  I'imagination  est  une  impression 
sur  I'ame,  ce  terme  d'impression  etant  justement  tire  des  figures  que  Ton  fait 
dans  la  cire  avec  des  sceaux."^  Junius  ne  pretend  pas  proposer  une  analyse 
systematique  de  ces  theses:  il  veut  surtout  illustrer,  en  les  juxtaposant,  la  con- 
tinuite  de  certains  concepts  et  leur  inflechissement  dans  I'histoire  de  la  pensee. 
Ici,  il  montre  comment  le  platonisme  et  I'aristotelisme  que  Ton  a  tendance  a 
opposer  trop  rapidement  peuvent  se  completer.  Get  eclectisme,  nous  venons 
de  I'evoquer  a  propos  de  I'imitation;  nous  avons  dit  que  Ciceron  en  etait  I'ini- 
tiateur,  I'anecdote  de  Zeuxis  et  du  portrait  d'Helene  reconciliant  le  natura- 
lisme  aristotelicien  et  I'idealisme  platonicien.  Or,  justement,  ce  sont  encore 
deux  citations  de  I'orateur  remain  qui  introduisent  les  deux  paragraphes  qui 
nous  occupent.  Dans  la  premiere,  extraite  du  Definibus,  1,  64,  il  constate  que 
"tout  ce  que  nous  discernons  par  I'esprit  tire  son  origine  des  sens'' —  Quidquid 
animo  cernimus,  id  omne  oritur  a  sensibus.  Ce  sensualisme  epicurien  n'est  pas  sans 
evoquer  certaines  formules  aristoteliciennes.  La  seconde  est  celle,  prise  au  §.9 
du  De  oratore,  qu'il  cite  ensuite  plus  longuement  et  que  nous  avons  rappelee 
plus  haut:  Informis  et  infiguris  est  aliquid  perfectum  et  excellens.  .  .  .  Nous  consta- 
tons  encore  que  Junius  a  parfaitement  compris  la  place  particuliere  de  Ci- 
ceron dans  I'histoire  des  idees:  son  eclectisme  accueillant,  la  formulation  claire 
qu'il  donna  aux  grands  sujets  traites  par  la  philosophie  grecque  ont  fait  de 
lui  le  mediateur  entre  les  differentes  doctrines  antiques  et  I'humanisme  mo- 
derne. 

Le  probleme  de  I'imagination  en  art  n'est  pas  seulement  theorique:  c'est 
aussi  celui  de  son  utilisation  et  de  ses  productions.  En  abordant  ces  questions, 
Junius  temoigne  de  revolution  de  celle  qui  va  bientot  meriter  le  nom  de  "mai- 
tresse  d'erreur  et  de  faussete,"  mais  aussi,  plus  tard,  celui  de  "reine  des  fa- 
cultes."  L'imagination,  aidee  de  la  memoria  permet,  en  effet,  a  I'artiste  de  se 
constituer  une  sorte  d' index  imaginum,  ecrit-il  au  §.6  du  chapitre  2.  Pour  y  par- 
venir,  il  doit  savoir  I'exercer,  apprendre  a  saisir  les  informations  souvent  fu- 
gaces  donnees  par  ses  yeux,  a  choisir  celles  qui  meritent  d'etre  retenues  et 
a  les  imprimer  profondement  dans  son  esprit  pour  les  en  faire  ressortir  au 
besoin.  II  faut  aussi,  dira-t-il  au  §.6  du  chapitre  4,  la  nourrir  de  grandes  cho- 
ses  pour  lui  permettre  de  s'elever.  Junius  trouve  chez  les  anciens,  chez  les  ora- 
teurs  surtout,  toute  sorte  de  conseils  et  d'exemples  pour  y  parvenir. 


U2  DE  PICTURA  UETERUM   DE  FRANCISCUS  JUNIUS 

Cette  imagination  qui  permet  d'avoir  present  a  I'esprit  ce  que  Ton  n'a  pas 
sous  les  yeux  est  le  complement  necessaire  de  limitation  qui,  avec  elle,  quitte 
les  sentiers  battus  pour  atteindre  les  sommets  de  I'art  (3,  §.9). 

Son  parallele  entre  la  poesie  et  la  peinture  donne  a  Junius  I'occasion  de 
revenir  sur  ces  questions  en  suivant  plus  particulierement  I'analyse  du  pseudo- 
Longin.  C'est  I'imagination,  affirme-t-il,  qui  permet  au  poete  et  au  peintre 
de  voir  ce  qu'ils  vont  representer  "comme  si  cela  etait  sous  leurs  yeux"  — il 
repete  deux  fois  I'expression.  II  reprend,  en  le  paraphrasant,  le  §.4  du  cha- 
pitre  15  du  Traite  du  sublime:  le  grand  peintre,  comme  le  grand  poete,  sera 
capable  de  donner  I'illusion  d'avoir  vecu  ce  qu'il  montre.  Ainsi,  il  sera  a  la 
fois  efficace  et  fidele  a  son  sujet.  Comme  le  poete,  le  peintre  doit  done  eprou- 
ver  ce  qu'il  exprime:  Si  uis  me  flectere.  .  .  .  Junius  developpera  au  livre  III, 
chapitre  4,  §.4  la  celebre  formule  horatienne.  Ici,  il  s'attache  davantage  a 
indiquer  les  limites  dans  lesquelles  il  faut  tenir  I'imagination  pour  en  prevenir 
les  debordements.  L'exces  de  complaisance  en  ce  domaine  est  perilleux  et  con- 
duit au  ridicule;  il  avait  deja  insiste,  toujours  avec  le  pseudo-Longin,  sur  la 
necessite  de  freiner  I'imagination  —  la  metaphore  du  frein  se  trouve  au  §.2 
du  chapitre  2  du  Traite  du  sublime.  Enfm,  I'imagination  doit  toujours  s'appuyer 
sur  le  vrai,  car  "la  peinture  doit  toujours  representer  quelque  chose  de  vrai"  — 
picturam  semper  oportet  ueri  quid  repraesentare.  Et  Junius  reprend  a  la  tradition  clas- 
sique  latine  sa  critique  des  representations  monstrueuses  et  chimeriques.  II 
cite  en  particulier  Vitruve  et  Horace.  Remarquons,  a  ce  propos,  la  lecture 
qu'il  donne  des  vers  1-30  de  VArt  poetique.  On  avait  souvent  sorti  de  leur  con- 
texte  ces  vers  trop  fameux: 

.  .  .  Pictoribus  atque  poetis 

Quidlibet  audendi  semper  fuit  aequa  potestas.  .  . 

pour  justifier  les  productions  les  plus  delirantes  de  I'art.  Junius  releve  cette 
erreur  et  cite  integralement  le  passage  pour  lui  donner  sa  pleine  et  exacte  si- 
gnification. L'imagination  ne  saurait  divaguer;  elle  doit  etre  asservie  aux  fms 
de  I'art:  en  poesie,  elle  doit  viser  a  I'etonnement  — exTrXri^i^,  en  peinture,  a 
la  clarte  — evocpyeia.  Notons  la  transformation  que  Junius  fait  subir  a  la  dis- 
tinction de  Longin  chez  qui  I'sxtcXtjIi?  etait  la  fm  du  discours.  Ut  poesis  pictura, 
mais  aussi  ut  rhetorica  pictura. 

L'imagination  ainsi  congue  donne  a  I'oeuvre  sa  grandeur  tout  en  respec- 
tant  le  vrai  et  emporte  I'adhesion  du  spectateur.  Junius  le  montrera  au  cha- 
pitre suivant. 

Nous  avons  releve  dans  ce  developpement  que  Junius  insistait  sur  la  neces- 
site d'exercer  l'imagination  pour  I'utiliser  efficacement:  cela  nous  conduit  a 
notre  troisieme  point,  I'education  de  I'artiste.  C'est  pour  notre  auteur  un 
probleme  crucial:  il  le  souleve  a  plusieurs  reprises  dans  le  premier  livre,  il 
y  consacrera  tout  le  second. 

Pourquoi  cette  insistance?  D'abord,  parce  que  I'utilite  d'un  enseignement 


COLETTE   NATIVEL 


"3 


avait  ete  sou  vent  contestee  par  les  peintres.  Ensuite,  parce  que  professeur 
lui-meme,  il  avait  non  seulement  reflechi  a  la  pedagogie,  mais  aussi  eu  I'oc- 
casion  de  mettre  en  pratique  les  legons  des  maitres  anciens.  Ce  n'est  pas  un 
hasard  si  pour  traiter  ce  sujet  il  s'appuie  plus  volontiers  sur  Quintilien  que  sur 
Ciceron.  Mais,  s'il  emprunte  au  professeur  ses  conseils  pedagogiques,  c'est 
au  philosophe  qu'il  prend  sa  theorie  de  la  culture. 

II  aborde  ce  sujet  des  le  §.5  du  premier  chapitre,  apres  avoir  rappele  que 
I'imitation  est  une  facultas ,  un  don  de  la  nature:  un  fameux  passage  de  la  Vita 
Apollonii,  2,  22  de  Philostrate  lui  permet  de  reunir  les  deux  notions  de  nature 
et  d'art:  "Nous  convenons  que  si  la  faculte  d'imiter  vient  aux  hommes  par  na- 
ture (dx  9uaea)?),  Tart  de  peindre  repose  sur  un  ensemble  de  connaissances 
theoriques  (ix  TexvT)?)."^^  Nous  voila  au  noeud  du  debat:  la  nature  suffit- 
elle  a  faire  I'artiste?  Junius  ne  developpera  la  question  qu'au  §.1  du  chapitre 
4.  II  se  contente,  pour  I'instant,  d'une  formule  de  Quintilien  qui  resume  ex- 
actement  sa  position  {Institution  oratoire,  2,  17,  9):  Illudmodo  semel admonuisse  satis 
erit  omnia  quae  ars  consummauerit  a  natura  initia  duxisse  (II  suffira  de  faire  remar- 
quer  une  bonne  fois  que  tout  ce  que  I'art  a  porte  a  sa  perfection  a  tire  son 
origine  de  la  nature).  Le  chapitre  IV  illustre  sa  these  du  primat  de  la  nature. 
C'est  elle  qui  donne  talent  et  inspiration,  ecrit-il  au  §.1.  Mais  si  ces  dispo- 
sitions sont  necessaires,  elles  ne  sont  pas  suffisantes.  Junius  rencontre  chez 
Ciceron,  a  nouveau,  les  deux  grandes  traditions  antiques.  Empruntant  au 
second  livre  des  Tusculanes,  §.13,  I'image  de  Tame  qui  est  comme  un  champ 
qu'on  cultive,  il  rejoint  la  metaphore  du  jardinier  qu'on  trouve  en  276b-c  du 
Phedre;  en  affirmant,  avec  une  citation  du  Pro  Archia  7,15,  que  I'art  developpe 
la  nature,  il  rejoint  Aristote.  C'est  I'analyse  des  classiques  latins,  Horace  et  Quin- 
tilien, qu'il  cite  abondamiment. 

Eduquer,  c'est  done  enrichir  un  terrain  favorable.  Cette  culture  se  fait  grace 
aux  preceptes.  Junius  insiste,  avec  Ciceron,  sur  la  necessite  de  donner  avant 
tout  aux  eleves  des  principes  simples  et  peu  nombreux  —  bien  que  le  programme 
du  doctus  pictor  propose  au  livre  suivant  soit  quelque  peu  ambitieux  et  ency- 
clopedique.  Enfm,  il  souligne  avec  Quintilien  {Institution  7,  10,  8-9  et  proe- 
mion  du  livre  8)  et,  avant  lui,  les  Stoiciens.  que  I'art  fournit  une  methode 
{uia)  et  procede  avec  ordre  {ordine).  L'enseignement  ne  doit  pas  etre  dogma- 
tique,  mais  se  fonder  sur  I'usage  et  I'experience.  Car,  nous  dit  Junius,  en  trans- 
posant  a  I'art  une  celebre  formule  de  Crassus  {De  oratore  1,  146):  Artificia  non 
ex  artibus  nata  sunt,  sed  artes  ex  artificiis  ueluti  sunt  exortae  (Les  chefs-d'oeuvre  ne 
sont  pas  nes  des  arts,  ce  sont  les  arts  qui  sont  issus  des  chefs-d'oeuvre  comme 
par  hasard).  La  theorie  se  defmit  a  partir  de  la  pratique,  mais  pour  la  trans- 
cender:  nous  sommes  bien  loin  des  lectures  que  I'Academie  Royale  de  Pein- 
ture  et  de  Sculpture  donnera  du  De pictural  L'eclectisme  de  Quintilien  marque 
cet  enseignement.  Si  I'education  tire  profit  de  Timitation  des  predecesseurs, 
elle  le  fait  en  choisissant  en  chacun  ce  qu'il  a  de  meilleur  et,  surtout,  en  adap- 
tant  a  la  nature  de  I'eleve  les  lemons  des  anciens.  On  admire  la  souplesse  de 


114  ^^  PICTURA  UETERUM   DE  FRANCISCUS  JUNIUS 

cette  pedagogic:  fondee  sur  la  notion  d'adaptation,  elle  permet  de  develop- 
per  roriginalite  des  talents,  tout  en  conservant  la  richesse  de  la  tradition.  De 
plus,  le  choix  qu'elle  opere  chez  les  maitres  les  plus  divers  suppose  une  at- 
titude critique  a  leur  egard:  il  faut  les  utiliser,  mais  sans  aveuglement,  car 
ils  ne  sont  pas  parfaits  et  I'art  obeit  a  la  loi  du  progres;  on  peut  toujours  mieux 
faire.  Platon  et  Aristote  I'avaient  I'un  et  I'autre  affirme,'^  et  apres  eux  Ci- 
ceron,  au  §.71  du  Brutus:  Nihil  est  enim  simul  et  inuentum  et  perfectum  (Rien,  en 
effet,  n'est  en  meme  temps  invente  et  porte  a  sa  perfection).  Ainsi,  cette  imi- 
tation sera  plutot  une  innutrition,  une  occasion  pour  I'eleve  de  reflechir  sur 
les  qualites  des  grands  maitres.  Anciens  et  modernes  sont  renvoyes  dos  a 
dos.  .  .  .Et  c'est  encore  la  nature  qui  a  le  dernier  mot  puisque  Junius  conclut 
en  reprenant  Quintilien,  10,  2,  12:  Ea  quae  in  artifice  maxima  iudicantur,  minime 
sunt  imitabilia:  ingenium  nempe,  inuentio,  uis,  facilitas  et  quidquid  arte  non  traditur  (Ce 
a  quoi  on  attache  le  plus  grand  prix  dans  les  chefs-d'oeuvre,  c'est  justement 
ce  qui  est  le  moins  imitable:  le  talent,  la  puissance,  la  facilite  — et  tout  ce  que 
I'art  ne  peut  apprendre). 

On  pardonnera  a  cet  expose  d'avoir  privilegie  certains  points  et,  par  la 
meme,  de  ne  pas  rendre  compte  de  toutes  les  nuances  et  de  tous  les  aspects 
de  ce  premier  livre.  Mais  nous  croyons  en  avoir  montre  I'originalite  en  in- 
sistant  sur  les  theories  qu'il  developpe  et  la  fagon  dont  il  les  organise  entre  elles. 

Leur  diversite  est  a  I'origine  de  lectures  contradictoires,  car  on  s'est  sou- 
vent  contente  d'y  puiser  des  preceptes  detaches  du  contexte  dans  lequel  Ju- 
nius les  insere:  or,  le  De  pictura  n'est  pas  un  simple  florilege;  il  est  aussi,  nous 
esperons  I'avoir  prouve,  un  traite  d'esthetique  parfaitement  structure. 

Certes,  Rubens,  aussi  bien  que  Poussin,  a  pu  y  trouver  matiere  a  reflex- 
ion. C'est  qu'au  centre  de  cette  esthetique,  I'etude  des  rapports  entre  nature 
et  art  peut  donner  lieu  a  diverses  interpretations.  Choisir  et  adapter,  voila 
les  maitres  mots  de  cette  theorie;  mais  ce  choix,  pour  Rubens,  sera  celui  de 
la  nature  dans  son  abondance;  mais  cette  adaptation,  chez  Poussin,  aboutira, 
au  nom  de  cette  meme  nature,  a  la  stylisation. 

Enfm,  nous  souhaitons  avoir  montre,  avec  Junius,  I'importance  de  la  pensee 
esthetique  des  anciens.  D'abord  parce  qu'ils  sont  les  premiers  a  avoir  donne 
a  I'oeuvre  d'art  son  statut  particulier  parmi  les  productions  humaines;  ensuite, 
parce  qu'ils  ont  elabore  un  langage  specifique  pour  en  parler;  nous  avons 
largement  insiste  a  ce  propos  sur  le  role  fondamental  de  Ciceron:  le  De  pic- 
tura est  aussi  une  invitation  a  le  relire 


COLETTE   NATIVEL  II5 

Notes 


1.  Lettres  publiees  au  debut  du  De  pictura  (Ed.  1694). 

2.  Cf.  Christiaan  de  Jonge:  De  Irenische  Ecclesiologie  van  Franciscus  Junius  (1545-1602). 
Nieuwkoop,  1980,  IX-316  p. 

3.  C/".  la  biographie  redigee  par  Georges  Graevius,  publiee  au  debut  du  De  Pictura 
(Ed.  1694).  Nous  avons  complete  cette  unique  source  des  elements  fournis  par  sa 
correspondance  avec  Vossius:  Paul  Colomies  {Ed.),  Gerardi  Vossii  et  clarorum  uirorum  ad 
eum  epistolae.  Londini,  1690,  2  parties  en  1  vol.  in-fol. 

4.  En  voici  les  titres  complets,  dans  leur  ordre  chronologique:  -De  pictura  ueterum  libri 
tres.  Amstelaedami,  apud  Blaev,  1637,  in-4°,  pieces  limin.,  318  p. 

—  The  painting  of  the  ancients,  in  three  bookes:  declaring  by  historicall  observations  and  examples 
of  the  beginning,  progresse  and  consummation  of  .  .  that  art.  Written  first  in  latine  by  Fran- 
ciscus Junius  F.  F.  and  now  by  him  englished  with  some  additions  and  alterations.  Lon- 
don, R.  Hodgkinsonne,  1638,  in-4°,  pieces  limin.,  355  p. 

—  De  schilder-konst  der  oude  begrepen  in  drie  boecken  door  Franciscus  lunius.  Middelburgh, 
voor  Zacharias  Roman,  1641,  in-4°,  352p. 

-Reed.,  ibid.,  1659. 

—  De  Pictura  ueterum  libri  tres  tot  in  locis  emendati  et  tarn  multis  accessionibus  aucti  ut  plane  noui 
possint  uideri,  Accedit  Catalogus  architectorum,  mechanicorum,  sed  praecipue  pictorum,  statuari- 
orumque  caelatorum,  tornatorum,  aliorumqueartificumetoperumquaefecerunt.  Roterodami,  typis 
R.  Leers,  1694,  2  parties  en  1  vol.  in-fol. 

5.  Pomponius  Gauricus,  De  sculptura.  Florentiae,  1504. 

6.  Cf  lettre  de  Vossius  de  Juil.  1625,  n°  102  {Col.  1690). 

7.  Magnum  quidem  est  animatarum  inanimatarumque  rerum  uiuas  quasdam  imagines  animo  ca- 
pere;  maius  tamen,  earumdem  imaginum  indiscretam  similitudinem  exhibere:  praesertim,  si  non  satis 
habeat  artifex  inhaerere  singularium  naturae  operum  similitudini,  sed  potius  ex  diligenti  speciosis- 
simorum  corporum  inspectione  perfectum  aliquod  exemplar  animo  inscribat,  atque  ad  hoc,  tanquam 
ad  emendatissimum  Polycleti  canonem,  conspicuae  pulchritudinis  imagines  describat. 

8.  Erwin  Panofsky,  Idea:  ein  Beitrag  zur  Begriffsgeschichte  der  dlteren  Kunsttheorie .  Leip- 
zig, 1924,  in-4°,  145  p. 

9.  Le  texte  grec  est  le  suivant:  'Oi  Exoixoi  Xeyouai  9avxaaiav  elvai  TUTrcoaiv  iv  (l)ux^. 
xou  6v6(jLaTO(;  o{xei(0(;  ixexevriveYfxevou  dTio  tcov  xuticov  Iv  tco  xTjpw  utco  tou  SaxxuXiou 
Yevo[i,£vcov.  Junius  le  traduit:  Stoici  dicunt  phantasiam  esse  impressionem  in  animo;  uoce  ea  (im- 
pressionis)  proprie  translata  a  figuris  quae  in  cera  per  annulos  fiunt. 

10.  Le  texte  grec  est  le  suivant:  "A[L(p(x>  dfxoXoyoufxev  fjLi(xriTix'?|v  fxev  ix  9uaeaj<;  xoi? 
(ivGpcoTtoi^  fixeiv:  xt)v  Ypa9txT)v  8'  ix  xexvr)?.  Junius  traduit:  Ambo  consentimus  imitandi 
facultatem  a  natura  hominibus  aduenire:  pingendi  uero  pigritiam,  ab  arte  proficisci. 

11.  Platon,  Les  Lois,  769a,  cite  par  Junius  1,  §.7  et  Aristote,  La  poetique,  1449a. 


De  Mercuric  renascentibus  obvio  litteris* 

Karl  August  Neuhausen 

Etsi  Latinissimo  viro  praeside,  auditores  spectabiles,  in  ipsa  Biblio- 
theca  Augusta  sum  invitatus  ut  de  Mercurio^  loquerer  eloquentiae 
quoque  deo  antique  inter  Humanistas  redivivo,  ignoscatur  tamen, 
quaeso,  audaciae  meae,  si  forte  quisquam  miretur,  quod  unus  ex  iis,  qui  re- 
ferendi  quibusdam  susceptis  muneribus  huic  intersint  conventui,  Latina  uti 
lingua  non  sim  visus  vereri.  Etenim,  si  solum  me  — hac  praesertim  in  sede 
celeberrima  — Romanorum  veterum  linguam  tamquam  totius  orbis  Neo-Latini 
sermonem  patrium  adhibiturum  esse  maturius  comperissem,  vernaculam  me 
vocem  praelaturum  fuisse  pro  certo  habendum  est.  Quamobrem  conabor  ita 
dicere,  ut  nemo  sit  vestrum,  quin  intellegere  me  possit  —  favente  fortasse  ipso 
Mercurio  sermonis  litterarumque  deo,  quo  neminem  caelicolarum  illorum  con- 
stat magis  fuisse  varium  aut  multiplicem,  neminem  humani  generis  amantio- 
rem. 

Idem  igitur  Mercurius,  benevoli  auditores,  admodum  adulescens  vel  paene 
potius  puer  in  primo  scacorum  certamine  quodam  mundano  ApoUini  fratri  natu 
maiori  praestitisse  fertur  atque  hominibus  postea  praecepta  ludi  illius  regii  tra- 
didisse.  Marcus  enim  Hieronymus  Vida,  cuius  poetae  praeclari  celebratissi- 
mum  opus  est  'Christias,'  in  eo  carmine,  quod  'Scacchia  ludus'  inscribitur 
(quodque  Gualtherus  LUDWIG  congressus  nostri  gubernator  edidit  nuper  lu- 
culentissima  introductione  locupletatum),  et  alios  paganorum  deos  reddidit  re- 
surgentes  et  Mercurium  ita  induxit  agentem,  ut,  cum  Maia  eum  natum  et 
Phoebum  ApoUinem  luppiter  utriusque  pater  idemque  "superum  rector"  om- 
nibus caelicolis  praesentibus  solos  iussisset  decertare  adversis  ""inter  se  studiis  et 
ludicra  bella  fovere''  (v.  184),  ex  hoc  ille  tamquam  principali  scaciludio  evaderet 
victor.  Nee  vero  nostra  nunc  interest,  quibusnam  initis  rationibus  eundem  Mer- 
curium Vida  poeta  fmxerit  ipso  Apolline  praeter  ceteros  florente  deos  factum 
esse  superiorem.  Nam  primum  quidem  de  hoc  uno  Vidae  carmine  didactico 
disputabit  triduo  post  Di  CESARE  vir  de  omnibus  rebus  Vidianis  optime  me- 
ritus  eruendis.  Deinde  quaerentibus  nobis,  ubi  quandoque  aetate  redintegra- 


Il8  DE  MERCURIC  RENASCENTIBUS  OBVIO  LITTERIS 

torum  studiorum  antiquitatis  Mercurii  nomen  occurrerit  aut  ipsa  persona,  hoc 
tantum  videtur  considerandum  esse,  quomodo  fieri  omnino  potuerit,  ut  XVI. 
ineunte  saeculo  insignis  ille  poeta  Christianus  nova  inventa  re  mythica  Mer- 
curio  deo  Olympico  tantam  laudem  tribuendam  censeret,  quanta  ne  Apollo 
quidem  dignum  se  praebuisset. 

lam  vero,  quicumque  de  Mercurio  renascentium  obvio  litterarum  locis  di- 
cendi  consilium  ceperit,  in  multas  easque  gravissimas  incurret  difficultates.  Aliae 
enim  Graecorum  Romanorumque  deitates  quaedam  cum  maiores  tum  mi- 
nores  singulis  singulae  libris  aut  commentationibus  compluribus  proprie  iam 
ita  sunt  tractatae,  ut  facilius  perspici  possit,  quantum  eaedem  illae  inde  a  XIV. 
saeculo  usque  ad  XVII.  redivivae  valuerint.  Mercurium  autem  iisdem  resus- 
citatum  temporibus,  quamvis  antiquorum  in  ordine  deorum  sextum  fere  ob- 
tinuerit  locum,  renovatarum  aevo  litterarum  interdum  etiam  principem 
singularemque,  a  plerisque  nostri  saeculi  hominibus  doctis  adhuc  esse  neglec- 
tum  vel  ex  eo  colligendum  est,  quod  —  exceptis  aliquatenus  paucis,  quae  in  se- 
cunda  documentorum  vobis  propositorum  pagina  collocavi^  — illius  dei  nomen 
nuUius  libri  aut  similis  rei  foras  datae  exhibetur  inscriptione.  Desideratur  ergo 
utique  maius  quoddam  opus  soli  Mercurio  dedicatum  Humanistarum  aetate 
redivivo.  Haec  scilicet  fuit  causa,  cur  Societas  decimi  sexti  saeculi  studiis  provehen- 
dis  Francogallica  decem  fere  mensibus  ante  eum  conventum,  qui  unum  ad  Mer- 
curium accommodatus  institueretur,  agendum  curaret.  Itaque  primum  id 
Mercuriale  colloquium,  quod  proximo  anno  in  Universitate  urbis  Lille  biduum 
habebatur  cuiusque  ego  quoque  licet  x<o96Ta'uov  TipoacoTrov  eram  particeps,  et 
tria  continebat  documenta  chartis  mandata  et  decem  orationes  aeque  nondum 
divulgatas,  sed  interiecto  brevi  tempore  in  publicum  prodituras.  Sed  quam- 
quam  ea,  quae  colloquio  illo  collata  sunt  (quaeque  citare  longum  est),  tanto- 
pere  profecto  Mercurialia  studia  ad  XVI.  praecipue  saeculum  pertinentia 
provexerunt,  ut  numquam  hactenus  maiores  videantur  percipi  potuisse  pro- 
gressus,  consentaneum  tamen  est  unumquemque  eorum,  qui  oratores  tum  ex- 
stiterint,  selectas  tantummodo  artioribusque  circumscriptas  fmibus  Mercurii 
quasdam  regiones  attigisse.  Deesse  igitur  pergit  atque  aliquamdiu  certe  re- 
quiretur  volumen  aliquod  monographiae  instar  cunctos  Mercurii  renatis  et  lit- 
teris  et  artibus  obvii  aspectus  tot  tamque  varios  complexurum.  Quae  cum  ita 
sint,  hoc  quidem  tempore  non  plura  praestare  possum  quam  ut  lineas  non- 
nullas  describam,  quibus  ductis  et  fontes  planius  aperiantur  et  firmiter  tenean- 
tur  vestigia  itineris  a  Mercurio  per  omnia  facti  Humanistarum  saecula. 

Itaque,  quoniam  omnis  institutio  ratione  suscipienda  debet  a  defmitione  pro- 
ficisci  eius,  de  quo  disputatio  futura  est,  ante  Mercurii  ipsius  nomen  necnon 
renascentium  notionem  litterau-um  oportet  defmiri.  Nam  primum  quidem,  cum 
Mercurii  atque  Hermetis  nomina  ita  soleant  usurpari,  quasi  una  eademque 
semper  significetur  persona,  alterum  deum  ab  altero  monendum  est  haud  raro 
aliquantum  differre.  Quod  quidem  quam  sit  verum,  renovatis  litteris  iis,  quae 
ad  Mercurium  pertinent,  evidentissime  comprobatur.  Namque  cunctis  illis 


KARL  AUGUST  NEUHAUSEN  II9 

testimoniis  collustratis  facillime  quisque  intelleget  speciem  huius  dei  fuisse  quad- 
ruplicem.  Alius  enim  erat  Hermes  ille  Graecorum  exemplis  formatus,  2ilius 
Romanorum  ab  origine  profectus  Mercurius,  alius  sive  Hermes  Trismegistus 
sive  Mercurius  Termaximus  cum  Aegyptiorum  Toth  vel  Teuth  deo  exaequatus; 
accedebat,  ut  fieri  solet,  mixtum  quoddam  genus  ex  tribus  ceteris  ita  confla- 
tum,  ut  non  modo,  quibus  illius  dei  naturis  singulis  plus  an  minus  tribuen- 
dum  sit  momenti,  diiudicari  saepe  vix  possit,  sed  etiam  appareat  novas  quasdam 
eundem  deum  mutatum  induisse  formas.  Mercurii  autem  memoria  vel  ma- 
xime  floruit  inde  a  Cyriaco  Anconitano  divini  illius  patroni  cultore  tam  ex- 
cellenti,  ut  ipse  novus  vel  alter  Mercurius  iam  ab  aequalibus  appellaretur,^ 
Hermetica  aetas  decennio  fere  post  Cyriaci  mortem  vigere  coepit  tum,  cum 
Marsilius  Ficinus  Hermetis  Trismegisti,  quae  ferebantur,  scripta  ex  Graeco 
sermone  transtulit  in  Latinum."^ 

Sequitur,  ut  universa  haec  de  Mercurio  renascentibus  obvio  litteris  relatio 
in  duas  divisa  sit  partes,  quarum  altera  ad  renaturas  spectat  litteras,  altera  ad 
renatas.  Priore  enim  parte  Mercurialia  inde  a  Petrarca  Humanistarum  patre 
repetenda  sunt  usque  ad  Cyriaci  obitum  eodem  fere  anno  mortui,  quo  im- 
pressoria  ars  est  inventa,  posteriore  talia  in  memoriam  revocanda,  qualia  Fi- 
cini  a  temporibus  pertinent  ad  lacobum  Balde  Latinorum  poetarum,  qui 
quidem  in  omni  Germania  tum  eminuerint,  facile  principem.  Renascentium 
igitur  litterarum  vis  fmibus  his  constituta  tam  late  videtur  pate  re,  ut  plus  quam 
CCC  complectatur  saecula.  Quare,  ne  cogar  onus  Aetna  gravius  aut  labores 
Herculeis  molestiores  sustinere,  placeat  nunc  ea  dumtaxat  respicere,  quae  La- 
tinis  sint  litteris  mandata.  Ita  fit,  ut  praeteream  quaecumque  propriis  natio- 
num  Europaearum  litteris  de  Mercurio  exposita  sint,  Praetermittenda  porro 
hodie  arbitror,  etiamsi  summi  sunt  existimanda  esse  momenti,  ea  omnia,  quae 
de  Mercurii  simulacris  imaginibusque  cum  alii  renatarum  artium  historiae  peri- 
tissimi  disseruerunt  tum  WARBURG  SAXL  PANOFSKY  WIND.  Denique 
Latinis  ipsis  quoque  textibus  plurimis  supersedendum  est,  siquidem  sufficit 
fundamenta  iacere  explicandi,  qua  Mercurius  via  suum  per  Humanistarum 
litteras  iter  fecerit. 

Ut  igitur  a  love  poetae  veteres  incipere  soliti  sunt,  sic  nos  exordiri  debemus 
a  Petrarca.  Mythographum  enim,  qui  vocatur,  Vaticanum  Tertium,  cuius  opus 
inscribitur  De  diis  gentium  et  illorum  allegoriis,  non  Humanistarum  vixisse  aetate 
(quae  diu  communis  fuit  opinio),  sed  eiusdem  viri  opus  illud  medio  in  aevo 
esse  reponendum  atque  exeunte  XII.  saeculo  vel  XIII.  ineunte  ab  Alexandro 
Neckam  conscriptum,  libellum  autem  de  imaginibus  deorum  ab  Alberico  ducentis 
fere  annis  recentiore  exaratum  veri  simillimum  esse  iam  dudum  est  demon- 
stratum^  et  modo  confirmatum.^  Quas  quidem  res  ita  se  habere  Mercurii 
quoque  exemplo  fultum  iri  praemonendum  puto.  Ceterum  persuasum  mihi 
est  in  totius  mythologiae  Humanisticae  rationibus  enucleandis  nihil  protenus 
profici  posse,  nisi  ea  consuluissemus,  quae  et  Augustus  BUCK  studiorum  Hu- 
manitatis  Nestor  cum  alias  tum  ante  haec  duo  lustra  praecepit^  et  superiore 


I20  DE  MERCURIC  RENASCENTIBUS  OBVIO  LITTERIS 

anno  Bodo  GUTHMULLER  ea  commentatione,  qua  imprimis  Boccatii  et 
Berchorii  libris  mythologicis  inter  se  comparatis  nixus  exposuit,  qualis  neces- 
situdo  mythicis  rebus  intercessisset  cum  theologia  et  poetica.^  Ex  quo  perspi- 
cuum  est  primum  in  Petrarcae  Africam  inquirendum,  deinde  et  Boccatii  et 
Berchorii  ilia  opera  esse  tractanda,  post  eum  librum  afferendum,  qui  est  de 
imaginibus  deorum. 

Petrarca  autem  in  tertio  libro  Africae,  quo  opere  epico  emisso  nuUam  se  mai- 
orem  gloriam  adepturum  esse  sperabat,  deorum  dearumque  species  ordine  quo- 
dam  servato  legentium  sic  ob  oculos  posuit,  ut  hac  in  serie  Mercurius  post  lovem 
Saturnum  Neptunum  ApoUinemque  fratrem,  sed  ante  Martem  Vulcanum  Pana 
deos  itemque  ante  lunonem  Minervam  Venerem  Dianam  deas  reliquamque 
turbam  heroum  obtineat  locum  quintum:  ""Frater  it  hunc  iuxta  iunior.  .  ."  (v. 
174-180).  Malim  nimirum  nunc  mihi  liceat  philologorum  more  proprio  sep- 
tem  hos  versus  aeque  atque  omnes  alios  quos  sum  allaturus  textus  ita  singulos 
percensendo  expedire,  ut  nulla  praetermittatur  vox,  quo  facilius  cognoscatur, 
et  quibus  ex  fontibus  Petrarca  ceterique  auctores  singuli  hauserint  et  quatenus 
novi  quicquam  ab  iisdem  sit  additum  iis,  quae  mutuatus  commutanda  in  suos 
quisque  receperit  textus.  Sed  satis  est  habendum  speciminis  loco  nonnulla  Pet- 
rarcae illis  versibus  explorandis  subscripta  dinumeravisse  ac  ponderare,  quae 
concludenda  nobis  esse  videantur. 

Ac  primum  quidem  Petrarca  Mercurium,  etsi  paulo  superiorem  ei  locum 
tribuit  quam  antiquis  ille  temporibus  obtinere  consueverat,  multo  minore  af- 
fecit  apparatu  quam  Apollinem  duodeviginti  versibus  ornatum.  Deinde  in  toto 
hoc  deorum  antiquorum  auro  fulgentium  catalogo  excepta  una  lunone,  quam 
"reginam  dearum"  eandemque  "caram  lovis  sororem  et  coniugem"  Petrarca  de- 
scribit,  Mercurii  solius  nomen  deest.  Haec  autem  in  utramque  partem  disseri 
possunt:  Aut  enim  Mercurii  persona  perinde  atque  lunonis  Petrarcae  tam  nota 
fuisse  visa  est,  ut  ne  nomine  quidem  ille  egeret;  aut  eundem  deum  poeta  ipse 
non  tanta  esse  vi  duxit,  ut  pluribus  quam  septem  opus  esset  ei  versibus.  Pos- 
terior haec  interpretatio  nescio  an  veri  videatur  esse  similior  propterea,  quod 
Mercurii  Petrarca  uno  tantum  alio  Africae  suae  loco  (VII  166  s.)  facit  men- 
tionem  neque  ibi  quicquam  aliud  ilium  inducit  gerentem  nisi  lovi  se  comitem 
adiungentem,  Ne  in  familiarium  quidem  re  rum  libris  Petrarca  Mercurium 
commemorat  saepius  quam  semel;  nam  nusquam  alibi  nisi  media  in  metrica 
eius  ad  Horatium  poetam  eundemque  Mercurii  cultorem  epistula  (XXIV  10,25) 
illius  dei  nomen  occurrit:  ''Argutum  citharae/Mercurium  patrem.'"  Verum  eodem 
hoc  versiculo  illud  certe  fit  planius,  qua  commotus  causa  primum  Petrarca  Mer- 
curio  imposuerit  cognomen  "arguto."  Adiectivum  enim  hoc  et  in  meliorem  licet 
et  in  deteriorem  accipi  partem;  nam  "argutus"  non  modo  idem  atque  "acutus, 
prudens,  subtilis,  ingeniosus"  valere  potest  sed  etiam  idem  denotare  quod  "as- 
tutus"  vel  "versutus."  Utrumque  igitur,  quamvis  vocem  illam  ambiguam  ante 
Petrarcam  nemo  ad  Mercurium  ipsum  transtulisse  videatur,  omnino  ad  eius- 
dem  dei  mores  facultatesque  in  aperto  est  aptissime  quadrare.  Inde  efficitur 


KARL  AUGUST  NEUHAUSEN  121 

Petrarcam  et  consulto  ab  arguto  Mercurio  duxisse  describendi  eius  princi- 
pium  neque  invitum,  utrum  alteri  esset  an  alteri  huius  verbi  sensui  maior  sub- 
icienda  vis,  in  medio  reliquisse.  Itaque  non  est  mirum  eas  quoque  res,  quas 
Petrarca  deinceps  ex  Mercurii  virtutum  vitiorumque  thesauro  quodam  electas 
illius  potissimum  proprias  esse  confirmat,  ad  unam  fere  omnes  in  ea  eiusdem 
dei  cadere  signa,  quibus  eum  Graeci  Latinique  imprimis  auctores  inde  ab  Ro- 
mero Vergilio  Ovidioque  usque  ad  Martianum  Capellam,  Fulgentium  Mytho- 
graphumque  Tertium  sive  Alexandrum  Neckam  repraesentari  tradiderint.  Sed 
easdem  ob  causas  —  quamquam  nihil  paene  eorum,  quae  in  Mercurio  Petrarca 
depingendo  exhibet,  cum  scriptorum  eo  antiquiorum  testimoniis  non  congruere 
est  concedendum  —  dubitari  nequit,  quin  eidem  Humanistairum  patri  conti- 
gerit,  ut  novam  quandam  delinearet  speciem  Mercurii  cum  Philologia  "nova 
sponsa"  septemque  artibus  liberalibus  eius  dote  coniuncti.  Nam  omnibus  illis 
notis,  quibus  diversis  duo  fere  per  millennia  Mercurius  ab  aliis  erat  dis  dis- 
cretus,  quamvis  exiguo  spatio  diligentissime  in  unum  locum  coactis,  sed  simul 
primum  omisso  omni  genere  allegoricae  eius  interpretationis,  quae  per  totum 
fere  orbem  Christianum  inde  a  medio  aevo  usque  ad  Tridentinum  concilium 
vigere  non  desiit,  Petrarca  effecit,  ut  talis  ob  oculos  imago  versaretur,  qualem 
nemo  antea  ad  deum  ilium  aptam  esse  atque  accommodatam  fmxerat.  Itaque 
operae  pretium  est  exquirere,  num  quoque  modo  nova  haec  a  Petrarca  Mer- 
curii forma  et  figura  quodammodo  fundata  a  posteris  sit  recepta. 

Transeamus  igitur  et  ad  Genealogiae  deorum  gentilium  quindecim  libros  Boc- 
catii  et  ad  Berchorii  decimum  quintum  Reductorii  moralis  librum,  qui  inscrib- 
itur  Tractatus  de  reductione  fabularum  et  poetarum  poematibus  sive  Ovidius  moralizatus, 
cui  praemissum  est  caput  "De  formis  figurisque  deorum."  Quae  quidem  opera 
mythologica  inter  se  valde  differentia  ducentos  fere  per  annos  usque  ad  Gy- 
raldi  De  dis  gentium  variam  et  multiplicem  historiam  Natalisque  Comitis  Mythologiae 
sive  explicationis  fabularum  libros  decem  singula  valuisse  plurimum  nuperrime 
GUTHMULLER  tam  dilucide  ostendit,  ut  nihil  supra  posset.  Boccatium 
autem  in  Genealogia  sua  Ciceronis  imprimis  tertio  de  natura  deorum  libro  in- 
nixum  atque  confisum  et  alios  deos  et  Mercurium  depinxisse  nemo  est  qui  nes- 
ciat.  At  nemo,  quod  sciam,  adhuc  statuit  eundem  Boccatium  omnino  non  ea 
intuitum  esse,  quae  iam  Lactantius  {inst.  1,6,2)  ab  illo  multis  ailiis  locis  lau- 
datus  perspecta  habuerat:  ''Apud  Ciceronem  [scil.  nat.  deor.  3,56]  C.  Cotta pontifex 
disputans  contra  Stoicos.  .  .,  ut  more  Academicorum  omnia  faceret  incerta,  quinque fuisse 
Mercurios  aif  (etc.).  Etenim  Cicero  Academicus,  quamquam  I.e.  V  et  Soles  et 
Mercurios,  IV  et  Apollines  et  Aesculapios  pluresque  item  alios  enumerat  deos 
digestos,  tamen  tantum  revera  eorundem  singulorum  fuisse  numerum  ipse  ne- 
quaquam  asseveravit.  Nam  Cotta  ille,  quoniam  Academicorum  doctrinae  a 
Cicerone  ipso  totam  per  vitam  defensae  susceperat  patrocinium,  V  exstitisse 
Mercurios  vel  Apollines  IV  contendit  nulla  re  alia  impulsus  nisi  ut  Stoicorum 
de  deis  sententiae  refutandae  causa  probaret,  quantopere  illorum  opiniones 
inter  se  repugnarent  quamque  abstrusae  res  atque  ineptae  fuerint  evasurae, 


122  DE  MERCURIC  RENASCENTIBUS  OBVIO  LITTERIS 

si  eisdem  illis  crederetur.  Itaque  Boccatius,  quod  effugit  eum  prorsus,  quae 
Ciceronis  illo  in  libro  componendo  fuerint  consilia,  nulla  interposita  mora  omnia 
a  Cotta  de  Mercurio  dicta  pro  veris  habuit  et  deprompta  ipse  partitus  ita  di- 
visit,  ut  non  quinque  modo  (ut  Cotta  Ciceronianus  erat  cavillatus),  sed  etiam 
sex  Mercuries  inter  se  esse  distinguendos  ratus  disiecta  velut  dei  membra  in 
IV  libros  inter  se  procul  distantes  atque  in  XVII  distribueret  capita.^  Sed 
eadem  hac  inita  ratione  Boccatius  id  denique  est  consecutus,  ut  Humanista- 
rum  primus  scientifica  quadam  usus  methodo  quam  plurima  de  Mercurio  un- 
dique  congesta  offerret  legenda.  Petrarca  enim  non  plus  quam  novem  Mercurii 
res  maxime  memorabiles  septem  tantum  versibus  includi  voluerat,  Boccatius 
autem,  etsi  praeceptorem  ilium  suum  ceteris  praestantiorem  non  dubitavit  in 
caelum  ferre,  Ovidii  praecipue  XV  Metamorphoseon  libros  XV  Genealogiae  suae 
libris  imitatus  paene  de  omnibus,  quae  ad  Mercurium  referenda  viderentur, 
fecit  aequales  suos  certiores.  Eo  magis  igitur  est  mirandum,  quod  Boccatius 
Ovidianas  illas  Metamorphoses,  quamvis  toties  eas  aemulatus  in  suum  conver- 
terit  usum,  in  Mercurialibus  rebus  exponendis  non  videtur  sumpsisse  in  manus; 
ex  quo  illud  quoque  perspici  potest,  cur  nulla  fiat  apud  Boccatium  mentio  eius 
Mercurii,  qui  ab  Ovidio  Lactantioque  perhibetur  Argum  necavisse. 

Longe  autem  aliam  ac  Boccatius  scribendi  rationem  iniit  Berchorius,  etiamsi 
non  minoribus  quam  ille  Petrarcam  extulit  laudibus  et  quamquam  cum  in  omni 
Reductorio  suo  morali  tum  in  Ovidio  moralizato  aeque  ac  Boccatius  studuit  quam 
uberrimam  rerum  materiam  silvamque  comparare.  Cum  enim  in  deorum 
formis  figurisque  describendis  eadem  via  ac  ratione  procederet  atque  in  ce- 
teris operis  sui  partibus,  omnia  Mercurialia,  quae  memoratu  digna  ei  esse  vi- 
debantur,  ad  quadruplicem  illam  Christianae  interpretationis  direxit  normam, 
qua  quidem  litteralis  intellectus  sive  naturalis  sive  historicus  a  Christiana  ex- 
positione  sive  morali  sive  allegorica  distinguendus  esset.  Ita  factum  est,  ut  de 
Mercurio  Berchorius  paulo  plura  quam  Petrarca,  sed  multo  minora  quam  Boc- 
catius communicaret,  quia  nihil  de  Mercurio  ceterisque  dis  narrandum  cen- 
suit  nisi  ea,  quae  moralizata  ad  Christianam  veritatem  adaptari  possent. 
Accedit,  ut  ea  regula,  a  qua  Berchorius  numquam  discessit,  a  Boccatiana  ilia 
methodo  etiam  eo  differat,  quod  in  Mercurii  figura  illustranda  idem  et  ex  Ovi- 
dii Metamorphosibus  complura  excerpsit  et  allegorica  ilia  vel  mystica  vel  spiritali 
expositione  usus  est  ubique,  Boccatius  raro.  Quid  autem  omnino  de  allegorica 
hac  deorum  interpretatione  Berchorii  maxime  propria  iudicandum  esset,  Mer- 
curii quoque  exemplo  arcessito  obscurorum  virorum  epistulae  cuiusdam  auctor  tam 
acerbe  perstrinxit,  ut  nemini  certe  nostrum  his  litteris  non  eliciatur  risus. . .  }^ 

At  idem  illud  Berchorii  opus  (quale  Ovidianas  fabulas  ad  Christum  non  tam 
accommodasse  quam  detorsisse  etiam  Erasmus  est  questus)  diu  maxima  fuisse 
auctoritate  firmissima  Mercurialia  exstant  documenta.  Nam  in  Mercurii  na- 
tura  describenda  Albericum  ilium  perinde  atque  Christophorum  Bondelmon- 
tium,  cum  iter  suum  tertio  decennio  XV.  saeculi  per  mare  Aegaeum  enarraret 
factum,  totum  fere  de  Berchorii  expositionibus  pependisse  manifestum  est. 


KARL  AUGUST  NEUHAUSEN 


123 


Atqui  hoc  quoque  apparet  ab  eodem  rursus  commotum  illo  Bondelmontio  Cy- 
riacum  Anconitanum  tot  suas  suscepisse  per  orbem  antiquum  peregrinationes. 
Verumenimvero  utriusque  viri  de  Mercurio  testimonia  mirum  quantum  inter 
se  discrepant. 

Sambucus  quidem  Emblematum  ille  auctor,  ubi  primum  tot  tantaque  Mer- 
curii  commemoravit  insignia,  multos  denique  asserit  esse  homines,  qui  in  huius 
se  dei  patroni  tutelam  contulerint,  et  eos  quidem  vel  maxime,  qui  in  studiis 
Htterisque  versentur: 

Credo  Mercurium  praeesse  multis. 
Namque  haec  symbola  habent  suos  sequaces 
et  possunt  studiis  simul  dicari. 
Quod  Turnebe  facis  tuos  monesque}^ 

Primus  autem  eorum,  qui  quidem  Mercurio  omnem  suam  salutem  commi- 
serint,  centum  fere  annis  ante  Sambucum  Turnebumque  natos  eximie  exstitit 
Anconitanus  ille  Cyriacus.  Petrarca  enim  primus  Mercurium  ex  allegoricae 
illius  interpretationis  tcimquam  vinculis  liberatum  vindicatumque,  sed  eun- 
dem  deum  vir  vere  Christianus  longe  a  se  ipso  remotum  effmxerat  sibi  animo, 
Cyriacus  licet  ipse  quoque  Christianus  atque  etiam  cum  Papa  Cardinalibusque 
coniunctissimus  primus  ut  Socrates  a  rebus  occultis  philosophiam  sic  Mercu- 
rium a  caelestibus  iis  regionibus,  ubi  medio  ille  aevo  abditus  latuerat,  avocavit 
atque  ad  suam  ipsius  vitam  ita  adduxit,  ut  eundem  fautorem  divinum  nemo 
alius  ardentius  veneratus  esse  videatur,  Quanto  autem  amore  studioque  Cy- 
riacus inde  a  tricesimo  fere  aetatis  anno  Mercurium  tutorem  suum  complexus 
adoraverit,  elucet  liquidissime  ex  iis  precationibus,  quibus  idem,  quotiescumque 
erat  proficisci  paraturus,  almum  ilium  deum  artium  ingenii  mentis  facundi- 
aeque  patrem  necnon  viarum  itinerumque  ducem  orabat  atque  obsecrabat,  ut, 
quemadmodum  suam  undique  mentem  animumque  sanctissimo  suo  ipsius  nu- 
mine  fovisset  et  cuncta  sua  itinera  terra  marique  iam  antea  facta  tuta  semper 
rectaque  reddidisset,  sic  etiam  omne  per  aevum  menti  facundiaeque  opitula- 
retur  suae  atque  et  futurum  suum  et  omne  deinceps  per  orbem  iter  felix  faus- 
tum  beatumque  dirigeret  favitaret  comitaretur.  Earum  precationum  primam, 
quam  nullo  addito  commentario  primi  ediderant  BODNAR  et  MITCHELL, 
eandem  ipse  biennio  ante  quam  brevissimis  instructam  adnotationibus  potius 
adumbrare  quam  evolvere  temptavi  primus.' 

Interea  alias  huiusmodi  repperi  precationes  tres  easque  paucis  singulas  men- 
sibus  ilia  recentiores,  quarum  duae  magis  absconditae  quam  editae  exstant, 
tertia  eademque  postrema  adhuc  codice  quodam  asservata  principe  editione 
ipsa  quoque  est  digna.  Permagnum  autem  complevi  manuscripti  spatium,  quo 
primam  illam  precationem  tripertitcim  ac  summa  quadam  incredibilique  per- 
politam  arte  unoquoque  verbo  accuratius  enodato  interpretarer.  Eo  igitur  plures 
aequum  est  exigi  paginas  typis  mandandas,  ut  et  reliquae  Cyriaci  ad  Mer- 
curium precationes  soUemnes  perpendantur  et  cetera  tot  tractentur  testimonia, 


124 


DE   MERCURIC   RENASCENTIBUS  OBVIO   LITTERIS 


quibus  auctis  illustretur  nuUi  umquam  antea  homini  tarn  artam  cum  Mercu- 
rio  familiaritatem  intercessisse  quam  Cyriaco  nostro.  Quare,  quandoquidem 
cuncta  nunc  ilia  exhiberi  documenta  nequeunt,  hoc  saltern  sane  conducit  non 
tantum  IV  Cyriaci  supplicationum  textus  modo  laudatos  in  vestris  esse  ma- 
nibus  verum  etiam  omnium  locorum,  qui  cum  peculiari  illius  cultu  Mercuriali 
cohaerere  videantur,  mea  quidem  sententia  veterrimum  et  ex  quo  fonte  per- 
multa  possint  derivari,  quae  ad  eundem  ilium  Mercurio  unice  applicatum  re- 
ferenda sint.  Eodem  enim  fere  anno,  quo  Bondelmontius  ille  Berchorii  vestigiis 
ingressus  Mercurium  descripsit,  tricenarius  Cyriacus  sui  purgandi  causa  ex- 
prompsit,  quibus  rebus  adductus  quamvis  ipse  Christianae  addictus  fidei  gen- 
tilibus  tamen  poetis  lectitandis  tam  assidue  navaret  operam  atque  ceteris 
paganorum  deis  anteponeret  unum  Mercurium.  Namque  in  ea  epistula,  quam 
ad  amicum  quendam  Pieridum  cultorem  misit/^  Mercurium  fmgit  Cyriacus, 
cum  se  ex  abdito  ille  deus  cava  occuluisset  nube,  divinis  suis  exutum  orna- 
mentis  mira  ope  sibi  appropinquasse  atque  ad  eos  quoque,  qui  una  essent,  con- 
versum  perpetua  docuisse  oratione,  cur  ilia  studia,  in  quibus  ipsi  tantum 
consumerent  temporis,  a  Christiana  religione  neutiquam  essent  aliena  aut  ab- 
horrerent,  sed  eidem  etiam  maximo  fructui  esse  possent.  Itaque  Cyriacus  iis, 
quae  a  Mercurio  patefacta  commentus  erat,  auditis,  simulatque  caduciferum 
resumpta  divina  forma  ex  oculis  suis  evolavisse,  ipsius  autem  membra  somno 
excussa  esse  sensit,  de  mirifica  hac  visione  gaudio  elatus  amicum  ilium  cer- 
tiorem  facere  festinavit. 

Hactenus  de  Mercurio  renaturis  redivivo  litteris;  restat,  ut  de  renatis  pauca 
dicam.  Arrogantis  autem  esset  atque  imprudentis,  si  quisquam  de  Mercurio 
ilia  aetate  obvio  novi  quid  pronuntiare  vellet,  priusquam  Acta  colloquii  illius 
Mercurialis  anno  ante  habiti  fierent  publici  iuris.  Quapropter  praestat  par- 
umper  differre  tempus  exponendi,  quibus  sit  muneribus  Mercurius  functus  inde 
a  loanne  Mercurio  Corrigiensi  vel  Marullo  Pontano  aliisque  poetis  inclutis  vel 
Erasmo  Budaeoque  Humanistarum  principibus  ceterisque  pedestris  sermonis 
scriptoribus  usque  ad  emblematum  quosdam  mythologiarumque  auctores  et 
seu  Nicodemi  Frischlin  lulium  redivivum  seu  Atalantam  fugientem  Michaelis 
Maier.^*  Claudant  agmen,  quo  facilius  renati  Mercurii  vim  latissime  patuisse 
cernatur,  XVII.  saeculi  exempla  tria  inter  se  differentia  quam  plurimum.  Nam 
primum  quidem  Theatri  Chemici  sive  quattuor  sive  sex  volumina,  Musaeum  Her- 
meticum  Reformatum  et  Amplificatum,  Artis  auriferae  volumina  duo  tam  plena  sunt 
Mercurialium  locorum,  ut  vix  ullam  nancisci  videamur  paginam,  quae  careat 
nomine  Mercurii  utpote  regis  cuiusdam  Alchimistarum.^^  Deinde  attenti 
animi  eorum,  quibus  Mercurii  memoria  sit  cordi,  convertantur  velim  ad  duas 
comoedias  in  Britannia  conditas,  quarum  una  inscribitur  Mercurius  rusticans, 
altera  Mercurius  sive  litterarum  lucta;  ilia  enim  fabula  dissertatione  copiosissima 
ea  quidem,  sed  parum  in  vulgus  pervagata  abunde  iam  est  explanata,  haec 
autem  lepidissima  atque  admodum  elegans  indiget  omnino  et  nova  editione 
et  commentario  quodam,  nisi  vero  quispiam  opinatur  perbrevi  argumento  eo, 


KARL  AUGUST  NEUHAUSEN 


125 


quod  VIENKEN  nuper  illi  diligenter  elaborate  ac  tamquam  elucubrato  operi 
meritissimo  praemisit/''  contentos  nos  esse  debere. 

Postremo  iuvat  Mercurium  et  Monasterii  et  in  rusticorum  quorundam  agris 
honestissime  se  gerentem  observare.  Nam  Balde  ille  lesuita  idemque  egregius 
poeta,  cum  bello  tricenario  tarn  pestifero  nondum  confecto  illustrissimos  le- 
gates Monasterii  congregates  admonuisset  templum  lani  esse  claudendum,  al- 
tero  carmine  {silv.  IX  5)  non  dubitavit  Mercurium  deum  paciferum  in 
Westphalicam  illam  urbem  properantem  et  celebrare  et  implorare,  ut,  quod- 
cumque  pacis  componendae  gratia  expediret  geri,  perpetraret.  Easdem  poeta 
deo  dedit  partes  in  Poesi  Osca  sive  dramate  Georgico  vel  Atellano,  quod  in- 
geniosissime  contexuit  anno  ante  conciliatam  pacem  Westphalicam.  .  .  .^^  At 
vero  Latino  equidem  sermone  perpetuo  uti  sum  ausus,  Mercurium  cum  duo- 
bus  agricolis  Oscis  ipsum  quoque  paulisper  Osca  quadam  lingua  quamvis  li- 
mata  loquentem  repraesentare  cunctor.  Hoc  autem  utique  mihi  persuasi,  si 
omnes  loci,  qui  quidem  renascentium  litterarum  aetate  ad  Mercurium  per- 
tinerent,  uno  essent  volumine  comprehensi,  neminem  fore,  quin  perciperet  an- 
tiquorum  deorum  omnium  neminem,  quem  Humanistae  colerent,  magis  se 
idoneum  praestitisse  eodem  illo  Mercurio. 

Haec  habui  hodie,  quae  temporis  impeditus  angustiis  de  Mercurio  renas- 
centibus  litteris  memoriae  prodito  dicerem.  Reliquum  igitur  est,  benignissime 
quisque  auditor,  ut  hanc  ego  oratiunculam  eadem  perorem  prece  qua  Hora- 
tius  poeta  vere  Mercurialis  epistulam  ad  Numicium  missam: 

...  Si  quid  novisti  rectius  istis 
candidus  imperii;  si  nil,  his  utere  mecum. 


Notae 


*Ne  multus  essem  aut  explicanda  res  ipsa  parum  plana  fore  videretur,  audituris  docu- 
mentorum  aliquot  paginas  XX  porrexi  tamquam  corollarium.  Quocirca  neque  hanc 
rerum  copiam  legentibus  suppeditari  posse  et  ilia,  quae  recitavi,  decurata  debere  foras 
dari  doleo. 

* 

1.  De  huius  dei  natura,  qui  a  Graecis  nominatus  est  Epfxfj?,  Mercurius  a  Romanis, 

novissime  egit  P.  STOCKMEIER  in:  RAC  (cuius  articuli  primas  inspexi  plagulas  prelo 
paratas). 

2.  Imprimis  L.  SCHRADER,  "Hermes  im  Humanismus  .  .  .,"  in:  Italien  und die  Ro- 
mania in  Humanismus  und  Renaissance  .  .  .,  Wiesbaden  1983,  229-45. 

3.  Fusius  hac  de  re  J.  COLIN,  Cyriaque  d'Ancone  .  .  .,  Paris  1981. 

4.  Cf.  A.  GONZALEZ  BLANCO,  in:  ANRW  II  17.4,  1984,  2241-81. 

5.  Cf.  H.  LIEBESCHUTZ,  Fulgentius  Metqforalis .  .  .,  Leipzig.  .  .,  1926. 

6.  Adeundus  nunc  est  R.  HAUSSLER,  "Grundziige  antiker  Mythographie,"  in: 
Mythographie  derfriihen  Neuzeit .  .  .,  Wiesbaden  1984,  1-23. 


126  DE  MERCURIC  RENASCENTIBUS  OBVIO  LITTERIS 


7.  In:  Die  Rezeption  der  Antike  in  den  romanischen  Literaturen  der  Renaissance  .  .  .,  Berlin 
1976,  192-227 

8.  In:  Die  Antike- Rezeption  in  den  Wissenschaften  wdhrend  der  Renaissance  .  .  .,  Weinheim, 
1983,  129-48. 

9.  Reperiri  haec  queunt  omnia  ilia  in  editione,  quam  V.  ROMANO  instituit.  Nee 
vero  abstinere  possum,  quominus  eisudem  moneam  editionis  volumina  tam  late  dif- 
fusa non  vacare  mendis  erroribusque  adhuc  nondum  sublatis  argui  vel  primo  de  Mer- 
curio  capite  collustrato. 

10.  Commendaverim  perlegenda,  quae  insulsissimo  suo  more  Frater  qui  vocatur  Con- 
radus  Dollenkopffius  evomere  haud  fastidit  (EOV  28  BOMER). 

11.  Eum  sequor  textum  quem  praebent  A.  HENKEL  et  A.  SCHONE,  in:  Em- 
blemata  .  .  .,  Stuttgart  1967,  1768/9. 

12.  In:  Human.  Lovan.  32,  1983,  66-68;  of.  etiam  Vol.  33,  1984,  22-70. 

13.  Edidit  M.  MORICI,  in:  Giornale  Dantesco  7,  1899,  74-77. 

14.  De  huius  auctoris  vi  atque  indole  cf.  potissimum  H.  M.  E.  de  JONG,  Michael 
Maier's  Atlanta  fugiens  .  .  .,  Leiden  1969. 

15.  Farraginem  quandam  testimoniorum  obtulit  iam  H.M.E.  de  JONG  (v.s.), 

16.  Composuit  banc  dissertationem  Ann  J.  COTTON,  Birmingham  1972. 

17.  John  Blencowe,  Mercurius  sive  litterarum  lucta  ...  by  Heinz  J.  VIENKEN,  Hil- 
desheim.  .  .  1981,  5-9. 

18.  Tripertitum  hoc  drama  singulare  recenter  est  perscrutatus  J.  LEONHARDT 
dilucida  ea  oratione,  quam  "Philologie  in  Baldes  Drama  Georgicum"  inscribendam  idem 
se  mox  publicam  in  lucem  emissurum  esse  promisit. 


Zu  Thomas  Naogeorgs  Satiren* 
Hans-Gert  RolofJ 

Thomas  Naogeorg  publizierte  im  Jahre  1555  in  Basel  bei  Oporin  einen 
dreihundert  Seiten  starken  Band  mit  fiinf  Biichern  Satyrae  und  im 
Anhang  eine  lateinische  Ubersetzung  von  Plutarchs  De  animi  tran- 
quillitate  und  Senecas  De  Tranquillitate  vitae.^  Die  Satiren  umfassen  228  Seiten. 
Sie  haben  in  ihrer  Zeit  und  bei  der  Literarhistorie  wenig  Aufmerksamkeit  er- 
regt.  Heute  scheinen  sie  mehr  Beachtung  zu  fmden,  insbesondere  im  Zuge  der 
Erforschung  der  Phanomene  der  Satire  — einem  inzwischen  komplexen  und 
recht  diffusen  Arbeitsfeld,  das  fast  herausfordert,  Juvenal  zu  zitieren:  "difficile 
est,  satiram  non  scribere!" 

Die  sogen.  satirische  Literatur  tritt  uns  im  deutschen  Sprachbereich  des 
fiinfzehnten,  sechzehnten  und  siebzehnten  Jahrhunderts  als  breiter  und  viel- 
gestaltiger  Textstrom  entgegen,  iiber  dessen  Erscheinungen  und  Funktionen 
wir  bestenfalls  partiell  Bescheid  wissen,  trotz  der  innovativen  und  anregenden 
Forschungen  der  letzten  zwanzig  Jahre  von  Ulrich  Gaier,  Giinter  Hess,  Jiirgen 
Brummack  u.a.  Warum  gerade  im  Zeitraum  der  Mittleren  Deutschen  Lite- 
ratur das  satirische  Element  in  so  starkem  Mafie  vorhanden  ist,  bedarf  erst 
noch  der  Ergriindung.  Satirische  Schreibart  hat  es  vorher  und  nachher  ge- 
geben,  aber  sie  ist  wohl  nie  so  geschichtlich  konstitutiv  gewesen  wie  in  dieser 
Zeit.  Sicherlich  sind  die  vielfaltigen  Ideologien,  ihre  aufs  "Ankommen"  und 
"Durchsetzen"  ausgerichteten  Polemiken,  der  grundsatzliche  padagogische  Op- 
timismus  und  das  damit  verbundene  Engagement  an  morjilischer  Besserung  — 
je  nach  Ideologic  —  wichtige  Grundkomponenten  fiir  die  Anwendung  satiri- 
scher  Verfahrensweisen  in  der  Literatur  und  in  der  Bildkunst  dieser  J ahrhun- 
derte  gewesen.  Kaum  eine  Form,  deren  sich  diese  intentionale  Schreibart  nicht 
bedient  hatte.  Es  zeichnet  sich  ab,  dafi  man  den  Zugang  zu  diesem  Phano- 
men  weniger  vom  Theoretischen  und  von  traditionellen  Vorbildern  her  ge- 
winnen  kann,  als  vielmehr  durch  die  Erfassung  dessen,  was  unter  diesem  Aspekt 
transportiert  wird.  Die  zeitgenossischen  Wesensziige  des  Satirischen,  die  durch 
alle  Schichten  der  Schreibenden  gehen  und  sdle  sozialen  Kreise  von  den 


128  ZU  THOMAS  NAOGEORGS  SATIREN 

Hochsten  bis  zu  den  Niedersten  ins  satirische  Visier  nehmen,  haben  andere 
und  tiefere  Ursachen  als  formalistische  Adaptionen.  In  den  sprachlichen  und 
ikonographischen  Konkretisierungen  des  Satirischen  werden  Mentalitatsstruk- 
turen  deudich,  die  individuell  oder  gruppenspezifisch  reprasentativ  sind  und 
unterschiedliche  moralische  Wertsysteme  offenbaren,  seien  sie  nun  auf  reli- 
giosen,  kirchlichen,  philosophischen,  philologischen,  sozialen,  politischen,  all- 
gemeinmenschlichen  u.a.  Problemfeldern  lokalisiert.  Dem  Papstesel  steht  der 
Lutherische  Narr  gegeniiber,  dem  vir  obscurus  der  seiner  Geliebten  als  Reit- 
tier  dienende  Aristoteles,  dem  tolpelhaften  Bauern  der  sexualneurotische 
Priester,  der  Hure  die  Xantippe,  dem  dummlichen  Pfriindenjager  der  schein- 
heilige  Eremit  usw.  Es  gibt  wohl  kaum  eine  andere  Zeit,  die  sich  ein  noch 
grofieres  Potential  an  negativen  Zeitgenossen  schuf— und  jede  einzelne  Figur 
fungierte  zur  Warnung,  zum  Abscheu  fiir  ein  Publikum,  dessen  Gunst  der 
Schreiber,  Redner,  Zeichner  fiir  seine  Ideologie  zu  gewinnen  suchte.  Der  Sieg 
der  eigenen  Sache  durch  Verunglimpfung  des  Gegners  scheint  eine  der  be- 
vorzugten  Motivationen  dieser  Schreibart  gewesen  zu  sein.  Auffallig  ist,  wie 
wenig  Freude,  wie  wenig  Humor,  wie  wenig  Toleranz  und  Menschlichkeit  in 
diesen  deutschen  Texten  des  fiinfzehnten,  sechzehnten  und  siebzehnten  Jahr- 
hunderts  begegnet.  Das  horazische  "ridendo  verum  dicere"  trifft  man  nur  im 
Ausnahmefall  an.  Verspottung,  Verunglimpfung,  Verzerrung,  ja  bewufite  Ver- 
zeichnung  des  Menschlichen  lassen  die  mentalen  Intentionen  der  Diskrimi- 
nierung  und  scharfen  und  effektvollen  Dissoziierung  des  Gegners  erkennen. 
Das  besagt  auf  der  anderen  Seite,  dafi  der  ideologische  Puritanismus  sehr  ernst 
betrieben  wurde  und  dafi  wir  dahinter  grundsatzliche  und  im  einzelnen  Falle 
gewichtige  Wertsysteme  zu  vermuten  haben.  So  wird  man  die  vielfaltigen  sa- 
tirischen Exaltationen  historisch  am  ehesten  von  dem  hinter  ihnen  befmdlichen 
Wertsystem  erfahrbar  machen  konnen  und  von  da  aus  auf  den  moralisch- 
sozialen  Ernst  der  Aktionen  abheben  diirfen.  Der  Blick  hinter  die  Kulissen 
der  Satire  diirfte  am  besten  den  Funktionsmechanismus  dieser  Schreibart  zur 
Konkretisierung  ihrer  Weltsicht  erkennen  lassen. 

Ich  kann  mich  hier  im  Rahmen  des  Vortrags  mit  den  verschiedenen  An- 
sichten  nicht  auseinandersetzen,  sondern  mochte  Ihnen  vielmehr  einen  be- 
grenzten  Einblick  in  die  Vorstellungen  Naogeorgs  und  in  seine  Intentionen, 
die  er  mit  dieser  Textsorte  verfolgte,  umrifihaft  bieten. 


I. 

Wie  die  meisten  Schriftsteller  seiner  Zeit  hat  auch  Naogeorg  seinen  Satiren 
einige  literaturtheoretische  Hinweise  und  eine  intentionale  Funktionsbestim- 
mung  mit  auf  den  Weg  gegeben,  die  nicht  nur  dem  Leser  eine  anscheinend 
als  notig  erachtete  Orientierung  vermitteln,  sondern  die  vor  allem  dem  heu- 
tigen  Interpreten  Fingerzeige  geben,  wo  der  Weg  zum  adaequaten  Textver- 


HANS-GERT  ROLOFF  KQ 

standnis  entlang  zu  gehen  hat  und  wo  er  nicht  in  einer  Sackgasse  zu  enden 
droht. 

In  der  Widmung  an  den  damals  noch  sehr  jungen  Markgrafen  Georg  Fried- 
rich  von  Brandenburg- Ansbach  entschuldigt  er  sich  zunachst  dafiir,  dafi  er 
dem  Fiirsten  Texte  einer  Gattung  dediziere,  die  einerseits  bei  den  Deutschen 
wenig  erprobt  sei  und  andererseits  sich  keines  besonderen  Rufes  erfreue,  weil 
sie  als  schmahend,  frech  und  anstofiig  gelte  — "quum  hoc  scripti  genus  apud 
Germanos  hactenus  .  .  .  intentatum  inusitatumque  sit,  atque  volgo  male  au- 
diat,  tanquam  maledicum,  petulansque,  pariter  ac  obscoenum." 

Beide  Begriindungen  bediirfen  der  naheren  Betrachtung;  zunachst  die  Hte- 
raturgeschichtUche:  Naogeorg  bezieht  sich  expressis  verbis  auf  die  romische 
Verssatire,  die  in  seiner  Zeit  reprasentiert  wurde  durch  Horaz,  Persius,  lu- 
venal  und  in  deren  Gefolge  durch  den  ItaUener  Franciscus  Philelphus.  Ob- 
wohl  diese  Autoren  —  wie  man  aus  ihren  Drucklegungen  schhefien  darf  —  sich 
einiger  Bekanntheit  und  BeUebtheit  beim  gebildeten  PubUkum  erfreuten,  haben 
sie  in  Deutschland  bis  in  die  Mitte  des  sechzehnten  Jahrhunderts  keine  Spuren 
hterarischer  Imitation  hinterlassen.  Naogeorg  scheint  in  der  Tat  im  Bereich 
der  deutschen  Literatur  der  erste  zu  sein,  der  die  Tradition  der  romischen 
Verssatire  wieder  aufnahm  — ganz  im  Gegensatz  zu  ItaUen,  wo  diese  Gattung 
iiber  Philelphus  hinaus  bei  Tito  Vespasiano  Strozzi,  Ariost,  Bentivoglio  und 
anderen  weitergedieh.  "Aufs  Ganze  gesehen,  sind"  — wie  Otto  Weinreich^ 
sagte  — "die  Nachklange  der  romischen  Satiriker  in  den  romanischen  Dich- 
tungen  sicher  weit  haufiger  als  in  den  germanischen  gewesen."  So  kommt  auch 
unter  diesem  Aspekt  Naogeorgs  Erneuerung  der  romischen  Satire  Beachtung 
zu,  und  zwar  umso  mehr,  als  er  sich  fast  im  selben  Atemzug  von  den  eben 
genannten  Gewahrsleuten  wieder  distanziert.  Er  moniert  an  ihren  Texten,  dafi 
sie  zuweilen  zur  Anstofiigkeit  und  Unverfrorenheit  neigten  und  gewisse  Per- 
sonen  unter  Nennung  des  Namens  allzu  scharf  angriffen,  und  er  unterstellt, 
dafi  es  ihnen  nicht  so  sehr  auf  Wahrhaftigkeit  und  Ehrbarkeit  angekommen 
ware  als  vielmehr  auf  die  Lacherlichmachung  anvisierter  Gegner. 

Dem  jungen  Fiirsten  versichert  er,  dafi  er  sich  der  Freiziigigkeit  dieser 
Muster  enthalten  habe,  damit  seine  Satyren  nicht  so  unziichtig,  liistern  und 
bocksmafiig  ausfielen,  wie  jene  es  waren— "tam  petulantes,  tam  lascivi,  tamque 
cornuti."'^  Fiir  dieses  Keuschheitsgebot  hat  der  sonst  doch  gar  nicht  so  zim- 
perliche  Autor  allerdings  zwei  Kronzeugen  zur  Hand,  deren  autoritatives  Ge- 
wicht  nicht  so  sehr  ehrbarer  Ziichtigkeit  gilt,  als  vielmehr  unter 
ideologisch-moralischer  Perspektive  die  Verfahrensweise  vorgibt:  er  beruft  sich 
auf  Paulus,  Col.  3,8  — "nunc  autem  deponite  et  vos  omnia  iram,  indignatio- 
nem,  malitiam,  blasphemiam,  turpem  sermonem  de  ore  vestro"  —  freilich  leicht 
iiberformuliert,  wenn  er  temperamentvoU  die  Stelle  wiedergibt  "a  Paulo  ad- 
monemur,  non  solum  a  turpibus  factis,  verum  etiam  a  spurcis  obscoenisque 
cavere  sermonibus"  und  er  zitiert  — wie  andere  seiner  Zeit  — Hieronymus,  der 
der  Ansicht  war,  dafi  die  "generalis  de  vitiis  disputatio,  malorumque  repre- 


130 


ZU  THOMAS  NAOGEORGS  SATIREN 


hensio  ad  nullius  .  .  .  pertinet  iniuriam."^  Man  kann  Naogeorg  attestieren, 
dafi  er  sich  im  vordergriindigen,  sprachlich-formalen  Bereich  an  diese  Prin- 
zipien  gehalten  hat.  Nirgendwo  werden  Widersacher  direkt  angegriffen  oder 
lasterhafte  Vorgange  unflatig  artikuliert.  Aber  die  Griinde  fiir  diese  Zuriick- 
hsdtung  liegen  sicherlich  nicht  im  Protest  gegen  die  sich  gem  im  Unflat  sie- 
lende  grobianische  Stillage  seiner  Zeit,  sondern  vielmehr  in  der  durch  und  durch 
seriosen  Funktionsbestimmung  dieser  Textsorte  — so  wie  sie  Naogeorg  vor- 
schwebte  und  zu  welchem  Zweck  er  sie  letztUch  auch  wieder  reaktivierte. 

Die  Funktion  der  Satire  Uegt  fiir  Naogeorg  in  der  allgemeinen  Erorterung 
von  Lastern  und  in  deren  wirkungsvoller  Tadelung.  Was  Laster  ist,  bestimmt 
sich  fur  Naogeorg  eindeutig  aus  dessen  Opposition  zur  reinen  Lehre  des  Evan- 
geliums;  die  protestantische  Christologie  ist  demnach  der  Wertmesser  fiir  Tu- 
gend  und  Laster.  Gottlosigkeit  und  ihr  nachfolgende  Sittenverkehrtheit 
anzuprangern,  sind  weder  Lasterei  noch  Schmahung,  sondern  "admonitio, 
correctio,  zelus  pro  domo  regnoque  Dei."^  (So  miissen  von  diesem  Stand- 
punkt  aus  "non  vitia  solum,  ac  impietates,  sceleraque,  verum  ipsos  etiam  .  .  . 
homines  impios  sceleratos  .  .  .  odio  prosequamur."  Aus  Pflichtgefiihl  und 
NachstenUebe  seien  die  Laster  zu  geifieln  — "officium,  charitas,  zelus.")  Und 
wenn  man  nun  fragt,  wer  denn  den  ersten  Stein  aufheben  darf,  so  verweist 
uns  Naogeorg  wieder  auf  Hieronymus,  der  Epist.  75,13  die  Ansicht  vertrat, 
die  Aufgabe  der  Kritik  komme  den  Propheten  und  ehrenvollen  Mannern  zu, 
die  besser  und  rechtschaffener  waren,  als  diejenigen,  die  sie  tadelten.  Aktu- 
alisiert  man  dies  in  Bezug  auf  den  Autor,  so  miifite  der  Satiriker  der  Moralist 
par  excellence  sein.  Die  Konsequenz  —  auch  in  sozialer  Hinsicht  —  schliefilich 
ist  beachtlich:  je  scharfer  man  Laster  und  Gottlosigkeit  verhohne,  je  ferner 
miisse  man  zwangslaufig  von  ihnen  stehen  — "quo  magis  vitia  atque  impie- 
tatem  insectaris,  hoc  magis  ab  iis  cogeris  esse  alienus,  nisi  turpitudinem  ab- 
surditatemque  summam  velis  admittere,  tuique  esse  ipsius  condemnator."  Es 
wird  sich  noch  zeigen,  dafi  dies  der  Mafistab  ist,  an  dem  Naogeorg  z.B.  die 
Verhaltnisse  im  Wittenberg  der  vierziger  und  fiinfziger  Jahre  mifit. 

Es  ist  nun  hochst  aufschlufireich  zu  verfolgen,  wie  Naogeorg  im  Verlauf 
der  weiteren  Entwicklung  der  Funktionsbestimmung  die  Satire,  oder  besser: 
die  Lasterkritik  zu  einer  der  wichtigsten  Zielsetzungen  der  literarischen  Beta- 
tigung  iiberhaupt  erhebt.  Er  geht  dabei  von  der  rhetorischen  Frage  aus:  Ist 
nicht  die  Kritik  an  Lastern  und  Gottlosigkeit  nicht  nur  ehrenvoU  und  niitzlich, 
sondern  geradezu  notwendig?  —  "Quid  quod  vitiorum  impietatumque  taxatio 
non  solum  honesta  est  et  utilis,  verum  summopere  etiam  necessaria?"  —Und 
er  beantwortet  sie  mit  Jesaja  58,  1  mil  der  Stimme  Gottes:  "Clama,  ne  cesses, 
quasi  tuba  exalta  vocem  tuam  et  annuncia  populo  meo  scelera  eorum  et  domui 
lacob  peccata  eorum"  — "rufe,  zaudere  nicht,  erhebe  die  Stimme  wie  eine  Trom- 
pete  und  verkiinde  meinem  Volk  seine  Vergehen  und  dem  Hause  Jacob  seine 
Siinden!"  Hingegen  verdiirben  die  Schmeichler,  Liebediener  und  Heuchler 
iiberall  alles  — an  den  Hofen,  bei  den  Obrigkeiten,  im  Volk,  denn  sie  erwie- 


HANS-GERT  ROLOFF 


131 


sen  sich  cds  Feinde  der  Wahrheit  und  damit  gleichzeitig  als  Feinde  Christi; 
sie  aber  miissen  offendich  angeprangert  und  bekampft  warden.  Und  dann 
steht  der  folgenschwere  Satz:  "Concionator  aut  scriptor,  qui  nihil  damnat,  ne- 
minem  reprehendit,  nihilque  insectatur,  aliud  nihil  est,  quam  sal  infatuatum, 
quod,  iuxta  Christi  sententiam,  foras  proiectum,  conculcandum  est,  quum  nuUi 
sit  usui."^  — Ein  Prediger  oder  Schriftsteller,  der  nichts  kritisiert,  niemanden 
tadelt  und  nichts  mit  Hohn  verfolgt,  ist  nichts  anderes  als  wirkungsloses  Salz, 
das  nach  dem  Wort  Christi  (Afa^5,13)  vor  die  Tiir  geschiittet  und  zertreten 
werden  mufi,  da  es  niemandem  niitze  ist.  Der  Intellektuelle,  der  die  Fahig- 
keit  zum  Erkennen  hat,  hat  auch  die  Verantwortung  zum  Protest,  zur  Kritik  — 
hier  bei  Naogeorg  letztlich  im  Namen  Gottes;  klar  und  niichtem  formuliert 
er  diesen  Gedanken: 

qui  vera  oppugnari  cernit,  et  impia  doceri,  tenerique,  qui  scelera  vitiaque 
exundare,  vitamque  Evangelio  adversam  conspicatur,  et  silet,  connivet, 
dissimulat,  praeterit,  nihilque  attingit  nisi  moUi  articulo,  et  quasi  aliud 
agens,  non  doctor  aut  scriptor  est  sincerus,  quique  e  sincero  fonte  hau- 
riat:  sed  improbus  adulator,  aut  coUusor,  canis  mutus,  ut  ait  Propheta, 
non  valens  latrare,  deceptor  populi,  ventris  curator,  gratiae  ac  favoris 
humani  auceps  et  venator,  cuius  e  manibus  perditorum  hominum  ani- 
mas  Deus  requisiturus  est.^^  (Wer  erkennt,  dafi  die  Wahrheit  bekampft 
und  Gottlosigkeit  gelehrt  und  betrieben  wird,  wer  gewahr  wird,  dafi  Ver- 
brechen  und  Laster  iiberhand  nehmen  und  der  Lebenswandel  dem  Evan- 
gelium  entgegengesetzt  ist,  und  zu  alledem  schweigt,  die  Augen 
verschliefit,  sich  verstellt,  gleichgiiltig  daran  voriibergeht  und  gelegent- 
lich  mal  mit  dem  Finger  antippt  —  gleichsam  so,  als  sei  er  gerade  mit  etwas 
anderem  beschaftigt  —  das  ist  kein  lauterer  Gelehrter  und  Schriftsteller, 
der  aus  einem  lauteren  Quell  schopft,  sondern  vielmehr  ein  unredlicher 
Schmeichler  oder  Mitlaufer,  ein  stummer  Hund  (wie  der  Prophet  sagt, 
Jesaja  56,10)  der  nicht  zum  Bellen  taugt,  ein  Volksbetriiger,  ein  Diener 
des  Bauches,  einer  der  Gnade  und  Gunst  der  Menschen  zu  erschleichen 
und  zu  erjagen  sucht  — aus  dessen  Handen  wird  Gott  die  Seelen  der  ver- 
dorbenen  Menschen  einfordern.) 

Der  kritische  Intellektuelle,  sei  er  Philosoph,  Prediger,  Schriftsteller,  avan- 
ciert  hier  bei  Naogeorg  zu  einer  wichtigen  Machtposition  im  Hinblick  auf  die 
Moral  des  Staates  und  der  Gesellschaft:  Wie  das  Schwert  der  Obrigkeit  scharf 
sein  und  dadurch  den  Bosen  zum  Schrecken  gereichen  soil,  so  mufi  die  Rede 
des  Philosophen  oder  des  Predigers  von  Gottes  Wort  die  Eiterbeulen  an  Le- 
bensweise  und  Gesinnung  aufstechen  und  ausbrennen  — "Utque  magistratuum 
gladius  acutus  esse  debet,  eoque  malis  formidabilis:  ita  etisim  philosophi  vel 
divini  verbi  praeconis  oratio  ulcerosa  morum  atque  animi  pungere  ac  mor- 
dere  debet. "^' 

Diese  hohe  Positionsbestimmung  des  Intellektuellen,  der  in  Rede  und/oder 


132  ZU  THOMAS  NAOGEORGS  SATIREN 

Schrift  mit  seiner  Umwelt  kommuniziert,  ist  nicht  nur  auf  den  Rahmen  der 
vorliegenden  26  Texte  bezogen,  sondern  kodifiziert  dessen  Stellung  im  sozi- 
alen  Gefiige  seiner  Zeit  iiberhaupt.  Soweit  es  Naogeorg  direkt  betrifft,  so  sind 
die  Vorstellungen  mindestens  im  Hinblick  auf  seine  Schriftsteller-Existenz 
durchweg  konsequent,  denn  er  ist  in  allem,  was  er  literarisch  gestaltet  hat,  der 
Kritiker,  der  — wie  wir  uns  gewohnt  haben  zu  sagen  —  Satiriker  kat'exochen. 
Freilich  tauchen  mit  dem  Begriff  "Satiriker"  auch  terminologische  Probleme 
eigener  Art  auf,  die  hier  nicht  erortert  werden  konnen,  Mindestens  soviel  geht 
aus  der  Widmung  hervor,  dafi  Naogeorg  die  kritische  Weltsicht,  die  er  fur 
den  Schriftsteller  fordert,  und  die  in  der  konsequent  wertenden  Musterung  der 
Tugenden  und  Laster  griindet,  als  Akt  des  Satirischen  ansieht,  wobei  die  po- 
sitiven  Erscheinungen  nachdriicklich  gelobt  und  verlockend  dargestellt,  die 
negativen  aber,  die  Laster,  getadelt  und  auf  jede  nur  wirkungsvolle  Weise  ab- 
schreckend  figuriert  werden.  Die  Funktion  der  Lasterdarstellung  ist  deren 
Bekampfung  im  Sinne  von  Ermahnumg,  Belehrung  und  Aufklarung  iiber 
das  Verderbenbringende,  wenn  es  nicht  abgestellt  wird. 

Versucht  man  nun,  auf  Grund  der  Widmungsvorrede  einige  Voraussetzun- 
gen  fiir  die  Konstituierung  dieser  Texte  zu  fixieren,  so  ergibt  sich  Folgen- 
des: 

1 .  Naogeorgs  Motivation  fiir  seine  literarische  Arbeit  ist  sein  Engagement 
fiir  wahre  Frommigkeit  und  die  reine  Lehre  des  Evangeliums,  die  er  bewahrt 
und  verbreitet  sehen  will.  Er  lobt  und  ermutigt  jene,  die  sich  dafiir  einsetzen, 
er  verlacht,  verfolgt  und  tadelt  aber  diejenigen,  die  die  Frommigkeit  und  Jesus 
Christus  im  Stich  lassen  und  einer  verkehrten  Lehrmeinung  folgen: 

Veram  equidem  pietatem,  sinceramque  Evangelii  doctrinam  laudo,  ve- 
neror,  atque  colo,  cupioque  conservatam  propagatamque  tum  qui  stud- 
ium  hue  suum  operamque  conferunt,  pro  virili  collaudo  atque  hortor. 
E  regione,  verae  pietatis,  atque  adeo  Christi  Jesu  hostes  ac  desertores, 
pravaeque  doctrinae  sectatores,  defensoresque  derideo,  insector,  improbo, 
atque  reprehendo.  Similiter  mihi  in  utramque  partem  cum  virtutibus  vi- 
tiis  res  est.^^ 

Der  Zweck  der  offentlichen  Anprangerung  der  Laster  ist  moraldidaktisch  aus- 
gerichtet.  Deshalb  werden  nicht  nur  die  Laster  als  solche,  sondern  auch  die 
in  ihnen  beharrenden  Menschen,  die  als  gottlos  und  frevlerisch  anzusehen  sind, 
mit  Hafi  verfolgt.  Diese  Zurechtweisung  ist  nicht  nur  niitzlich,  sondern  in 
hohem  Mafie  notwendig,  denn  dadurch  wiirden  Ehrenhaftigkeit  und  der  wahre 
Glaube  ge fordert,  die  Laster  ausgerottet  und  es  wiirde  zur  Reue  ermahnt 
werden,  damit  die  Schlechten  nicht  durch  ihre  Verworfenheit  nach  Gottes  Ur- 
teil  in  ewige  verdiente  Strafe  fielen.  Der  padagogische  Optimismus  der  Zeit 
war  davon  iiberzeugt,  dafi  durch  die  Definition  und  Erfahrbarmachung  von 
Lastern  und  Tugenden  der  Mensch  auf  den  rechten  Weg  zur  Seligkeit  gebracht 
werden  konnte.  Freilich  ist  das  recht  problematisch,  da  gerade  die  Zeit  der 


HANS-GERT   ROLOFF 


133 


Glaubensspaltung  handgreiflich  lehrt,  wie  ideologiebezogen  und  deshalb  vielfal- 
tig  die  Wege  zur  Seligkeit  waren. 

2.  Was  also  ist  "Laster"  fiir  unseren  Autor,  evd.  fiir  seine  Gesinnungsgruppe? 
Und  wie  geschieht  dessen  Bestimmung,  welcher  Mafistab  wird  da  angelegt? 
Als  Laster  gilt,  was  kontrar  zu  den  Tugenden  der  Wahrhaftigkeit,  Gerech- 
tigkeit,  Keuschheit,  Frommigkeit  usw.  steht.  Der  Tugendlehre  liegt  ein  Sy- 
stem zugrunde,  das  sich  hier  bei  Naogeorg  an  Beispiel  und  Lehre  Christi,  der 
Propheten,  Apostel  und  der  Kirchenvater  orientiert.  Damit  ist  es  zwar  an  der 
christlichen  Heilsgeschichte  ausgerichtet,  jedoch  an  ihrer  evangelisch-prote- 
stantischen  Couleur,  ja  nicht  einmal  speziell  an  der  lutherisch-wittenbergischen 
Christologie.  Naogeorg  ist  nicht  der  erste  und  der  letzte,  der  versucht,  heils- 
geschichtliche  Kategorien  und  Wertsetzungen  zur  Richtschnur  fiir  das  mo- 
ralische  System  der  Gesellschaft  seiner  Zeit  zu  machen.  Insofern  ist  sein 
Wertsystem  nicht  absolut  zu  verstehen,  sondern  in  seiner  ideologischen  Be- 
dingtheit.  Auf  dem  weiten  Felde  der  literarischen  Erscheinungen  der  Zeit  lafit 
sich  durchaus  erkennen,  wie  unterschiedlich,  ja  kontrar  Phanomene  oder 
Wesen  als  laster-  oder  tugendhaft  exemplifiziert  werden.  Wichtig  ist  ferner, 
dafi  es  —  wie  Naogeorg  bestatigt  —  zur  Defmition  von  Lastern  auch  einer  Tu- 
genddarstellung  bedarf,  um  im  Sinne  des  padagogischen  Optimismus  den  Aus- 
weg  und  den  besseren  Pfad  als  moglichen  und  existenten  zu  zeigen,  weshalb 
gerade  fiir  diese  Exempel  gem  auf  reale  Personlichkeiten  oder  geschichtliche 
Vorgange  zuriickgegriffen  wird. 

3.  Sind  die  Laster  in  ihrem  prinzipiellen  Wesen  erkannt,  beginnt  der  Vor- 
gang  der  literarisch-  oder  ikonographisch-artifiziellen  Exemplifizierung  — an 
welchen  Fallen  kann  das  geschehen?!  Und  hier  begegnet  uns  die  Fiille  der 
sogen.  "satirischen  Formelemente"  und  der  Stoffe  und  Typen,  die  Laster  repra- 
sentieren.  Die  Intention  der  Laster-Bekampfung  erfordert  vom  Autor  eine  ge- 
naue  Entscheidung,  welche  Kommunikationsmittel  sich  dazu  am 
wirkungsvoUsten  eignen.  Ihm  steht  dabei  die  ganze  Palette  der  Medien  und 
Formen  sprachlicher  und  ikonographischer  Kommunikation  zur  Verfiigung. 
Wie  allein  die  Textempirie  des  16.  Jahrhunderts  zeigt,  ist  praktisch  jede  Gat- 
tung,  jede  Form  geeignet,  Lasterkritik  zu  transportieren:  Drama,  Epos,  Roman, 
Lehrgedicht,  Rede,  Traktat,  Brief,  Lied,  Epigramm  —  uberall  kann  Laster  de- 
fmiert  und  kritisiert  werden.  D.h.  fur  die  literarische  Bekampfung  der  Laster 
ist  weder  eine  Gattung  noch  eine  bestimmte  Form  speziell  reserviert,  noch  stellt 
sie  selbst  eine  Gattung  oder  Textsorte  dar,  sondern  entscheidend  ist  allein  die 
Realisierungschance  der  intendierten  Wirkung.  Die  angewandte  Form  ergibt 
sich  aus  der  im  Sinne  des  aptum  erfolgenden  Berechnung  der  Wirkung,  also 
aus  den  Faktoren  des  movere,  docere,  delectare  und  der  Adressaten,  evd.  auch  noch 
aus  dem  Sujet  selbst. 

Naogeorg  ist  das  beste  Beispiel  hierfur:  sein  gesamtes  SchafTen  ist  mit  aller 
sprachlichen  Konnerschaift  und  bajuvarischer  Inbrunst  der  Laster-Bekampfung 
gewidmet.  Er  hat  sich  dabei  mit  grofitem  Erfolg  des  Dramas,  des  Epos,  des 


134  ZU  THOMAS  NAOGEORGS  SATIREN 

Lehrgedichts  und  einiger  Kleinformen  bedient.  In  unserem  konkreten  Fall  hat 
er  eine  Textform  aufgegriffen  und  fur  seine  Zwecke  funktionalisiert,  die  in 
der  Tradition  der  literarischen  Laster-Bekampfung  bereits  erfolgreich  ver- 
wendet  worden  war.  Ihre  Eignung  bestand  in  der  Moglichkeit,  exemplarisch 
herausgegriffene  Laster  und  Tugenden,  die  von  grundsatzlicher  moralischer 
Aussagekraft  sind,  im  Verbundsystem  eines  Buches  erfahrbar  zu  machen.  Ob 
es  sich  dabei  nur  um  eine  Buchbindersynthese  oder  aber  um  eine  von  der  Ar- 
gumentation bestimmte  innere  Struktur  handelt,  wird  noch  zu  zeigen  sein. 
Die  pragmatische  Widmungsvorrede  Naogeorgs  enthalt  in  gebotener  Kiirze 
wesentliche  Ansichten  zum  Problem-Feld  der  Lasterkritik;  von  ihnen  aus  liefien 
sich  aufschlufireiche  Grundlinien  fiir  den  ganzen,  uns  heute  noch  recht  dif- 
fusen,  Problemkomplex  des  Satirischen  ziehen.  Doch  ist  das  hier  nicht  das 
Thema;  gehen  wir  lieber  zu  den  Texten  iiber! 


Sieht  man  sich  die  26  Texte  an,  die  Naogeorg  in  fiinf  Biichern  zusammen- 
fafite,  so  fallt  auf,  dafi  drei  Texte  Tugenden  thematisieren,  sieben  Texte  heils- 
geschichtlichen  Themen  gewidmet  sind  und  "nur"  16  Texte  zeitbezogene 
Lasterkritik  betreiben.  Jede  dieser  drei  Themengruppen  ist  wiederum  in 
kontrare  oder  variierende  Themen  aufgeteilt.  Aufierdem  unterliegen  sie  dem 
Gesetz  der  "schonen  Unordnung"  und  sind  scheinbar  wahllos  und  zufallig  im 
Gesamtrahmen  des  Buches  verstreut.  Rekonstruiert  man  aber  die  historisch- 
logische  Abfolge,  so  stimmen  sie  alle  in  ihren  Intentionen  mit  dem  Gesamtziel 
iiberein!  Es  war  sicherlich  als  Reizmoment  fiir  den  Leser  gedacht,  dafi  er  die- 
sen  metaphysischen  Zusammenhang  im  Lastersystem  selbst  entdecken  sollte. 

Der  heilsgeschichtliche  Darstellungskomplex,  der  einerseits  die  Tugenden, 
andererseits  das  durch  die  Machinationen  des  Teufels  betriebene  Verderben 
exemplifiziert,  iiberwolbt  sozusagen  das  irdische  Spannungsfeld  der  "vitia"  und 
"virtutes."  Damit  wird  die  Heilsgeschichte  unmittelbar  auf  die  Vorgange  der 
Weltgeschichte  projiziert  und  in  moralischer  Hinsicht  eine  enge  genetische  Ver- 
bindung  zwischen  Diesseits  und  Jenseits  hergestellt. 

Die  Fiille  der  von  Naogeorg  angefiihrten  und  anvisierten  Probleme  seiner 
Zeit  — er  hat  sie  von  seinem  Standpunkt  aus  gut  im  Blick  gehabt  — wird  sich 
in  ihrer  vollen  Tragweite  erst  erschliefien,  wenn  man  sie  in  einen  historischen 
Kommentar  einbauen  kann.  Das  wird  bei  der  angestrebten  Verfremdung  und 
Verklausulierung  der  gemeinten  Vorgange  sehr  schwierig,  ja  bisweilen  kaum 
losbar  sein,  dennoch  wird  man  es  versuchen.  Die  Texte  fordern  es  und  ihre 
in  humaner  wie  in  geschichtlicher  Hinsicht  tiefgreifenden  Aussagen  diirften 
das  auch  rechtfertigen.  Auch  bei  den  Satiren  bestatigt  es  sich  wieder:  wir  haben 
es  bei  Naogeorg  mit  einem  der  bedeutendsten  und  tiefgriindigsten  der  Auto- 
ren  des  16.  Jahrhunderts  zu  tun,  dessen  wahres  intellektuelles  Potential  erst 
durch  unvoreingenommene  literaturwissenschaftliche  Analyse  herausprapa- 


HANS-GERT  ROLOFF 


135 


riert  werden  kann;  bisher  stand  er  bestenfalls  im  Forschungsschatten  prote- 
st2intisch-theologischer-lutherischer  Erschliefiungen  —  und  von  daher  ist  ihm  nur 
seine  kontrare  Position  angerechnet  worden.  Und  wer  lafit  sich  schon  gem 
die  hohen  Meisterbilder  kritisch  ankratzen?!  Naogeorgs  Lasterkritik  ist  fiir 
die  Einschatzung  der  geistigen  Situation  seiner  Zeit  von  besonderem  histo- 
rischem  Wert.  Die  Satiren  sind  in  erster  Linie  als  unmittelbarer  Ausdruck  des 
vielschichtigen  intellektuellen  Geschichtsprozesses  zu  sehen,  ihre  formale  Be- 
ziehung  zur  Tradition  der  romischen  Satire  ist  von  sekundarer  Bedeutung. 
Dafi  die  protestantische  Christologie,  dafi  die  Gotteslehre  als  moralisches  Basis- 
System  und  als  Wertmafistab  einer  nach  neuen  Wertorientierungen  suchenden 
Zeit  angesetzt  wird,  ist  nicht  Erfindung  Naogeorgs  gewesen,  sondern  Gemein- 
gut.  Die  Heilsgeschichte  bestimmte  noch  weithin  das  Denken  der  Zeitgeschich- 
te. 

Schliefien  wir  mit  ein  paar  Worten  Naogeorgs,  deren  rationail-irenische  Vor- 
stellung  fast  ein  Motto  pazifistischer  Bemiihungen  unserer  Tage  abgeben 
konnte: 

NuUus  enim  ferro  flammisque  extinguitur  error, 

Puro  sed  Domini  verbo,  vel  luce  suprema. 

Id  quod  fundati  manifestum  ab  origine  mundi  V.  (p. 223) 

"Kein  Irrtum  kann  mit  Schwert  oder  Feuer  ausgerottet  werden,  sondern  nur 
mit  dem  reinen  Wort  des  Herrn  oder  dem  Licht  des  Himmels.  Das  ist  es,  was 
seit  Beginn  der  festgegriindeten  Welt  offenbar  ist." 


Anmerkungen 


*  Der  hier  abgedruckte  Beitrag  ist  eine  aus  Umfangsgriinden  gekiirzte  Fassung 
meines  Vortrages,  wobei  auf  die  Detailbeschreibungen  verzichtet  werden  mufite.  Der 
gesamte  Vortragstext  wird  im  Daphnis.  Zeitschrift  fur  Mittlere  Deutsche  Literatur ,  Band  16 
(1987),  erscheinen. 

1 .  Satyrarum  Libri  quinque  priores:  Thoma  Naogeorgo  Straubingensi  autore.  His  sunt  adiuncti, 
de  Animi  tranquillitate  duo  libelli:  unus  Plutarchi,  latinus  ab  eode  foetus:  alter  Senec§:  cum 
Annotationib.  in  utrumque.  .  .  .  Basileae,  per  loannem  Oporinum.  Am  Schlufi:  Basileae, 
ex  officina  loannis  Oporini,  Anno  salutis  humanae  M.D.LV.  Mense  lulio.  Die  Sati- 
ren werden  1988  im  Rahmen  der  Ausgabe:  Thomas  Naogeorg.  Sdmtliche  Werke.  Berlin, 
New  York:  Walter  de  Gruyter,  erscheinen.  Mitarbeiter  des  Bandes  ist  Dr.  Lothar  Mundt, 
Berlin  FU,  der  sich  insbesondere  der  Ubersetzungen  der  Texte  angenommen  hat.  In 
dieser  Arbeit  wird  noch  nach  der  Originalausgabe  zitiert,  und  zwar  nach  der  Nr.  des 
Stiickes  und  ggf.  nach  der  Seitenzahl. 

2.  Satyrae,  I.e.  p. 4. 

3.  Otto  Weinreich,  in:  Einleitung  zu:  Romische  Satiren,  Zurich  1949  (Bibliothek  der 
alten  Welt),  p.  C. 


136 


ZU  THOMAS  NAOGEORGS  SATIREN 


4.  Satyrae,  I.e.  p. 5.  "ut  ne  Satyri  mei,  unde  Satyrae  nomen  deductum  volunt,  tarn 
petulantes,  tam  lascivi,  tamque  cornuti  essent,  quam  illorum  fuere." 

5.  Satyrae,  I.e.  p. 5. 

6.  Satyrae,  I.e.  p. 7. 

7.  Satyrae,  I.e.  p.  10. 

8.  Satyrae,  I.e.  p.  10. 

9.  Satyrae,  I.e.  p.  13. 

10.  Satyrae,  I.e.  p.  14. 

11.  Satyrae,  I.e.  p.  15. 

12.  Satyrae,  I.e.  p.5sq. 


On  the  Editing  of  Classical  Texts 

Before  Vinet:  Early  Printed  Editions 

of  Ausonius  before  1580 

R.  J.  Schoeck 

In  surveys  or  brief  histories  of  classical  scholarship,  it  sometimes  appears 
that  there  is  a  great  gap  between  the  monumentad  work  of  Politian  at  the 
end  of  the  fifteenth  century  and  that  of  J.  J.  Scaliger  at  the  end  of  the 
sixteenth  and  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  centuries.  Even  if  the  focus  is  nar- 
rowed to  the  history  of  textual  theory  and  the  editing  of  texts,  the  work  of  less 
celebrated  scholars  of  Italy  and  France  during  this  century  is  too  often  slighted; 
yet  their  work  needs  and  deserves  closer  attention.^ 

I  want  to  gain  in  focus  by  taking  a  single  exemplar  and  analyzing  his  for- 
tunes with  early  humanist  editors  in  some  detail.  In  many  ways  Cicero  and 
Virgil  are  examples  too  special  for  building  any  larger  generalizations.  Cicero 
cannot  be  used  because  he  was  not  simply  a  man  but  eloquence  itself  ("Non 
Hominis  Nomen,  Sed  Eloquentiae"^),  because  his  name  became  attached  to 
a  seminal  schoolbook  that  was  not  his  —  the  Rhetorica  ad  Herennium  —  and  be- 
cause in  the  later  Renaissance  certain  quarrels  over  style  were  focused  on  the 
question  of  Ciceronianism,  which  had  exaggerated  traits  in  the  style  of  Cicero 
himself.^  Virgil  is  too  special  because  the  prophetic  quality  of  his  Fourth 
Eclogue  — not  to  speak  of  the  Aeneid  itself— endeared  him  to  generations  of  al- 
legorizers  from  Fulgentius  onward,  and  because  he  could  be  taken  as  the 
spokesman  for  Romanitas  as  well  as  for  human  reason,  thereby  doubly  endear- 
ing him  to  Dante.  Parallel  qualifications  could  be  voiced  for  the  use  of  Horace 
or  Ovid.'^  And  so  I  take  as  example  Decimus  Magnus  Ausonius  (c.  310-c.  395 
A.D.),  a  late-classical,  early-Christian  writer  who  was  not  so  much  a  part  of 
the  medieval  pedagogical  canon  as  others  were,  but  who  was  widely  published 
and  edited  during  the  humanistic  period  and  much  read  for  a  wide  range  of 
reasons.^ 

Ausonius  of  course  was  not  unknown  in  the  Middle  Ages,  for  Roberto  Weiss 
has  shown  that  there  was  a  manuscript  tradition  in  the  ninth  and  tenth  cen- 
turies, and  that  he  was  read  by  Ermenrich  and  quoted  by  John  of  Salisbury; 
in  addition,  three  manuscripts  of  the  eleventh  century  are  known,  plus  one 


138  THE   EDITING  OF  CLASSICAL  TEXTS  BEFORE  VINET 

now  lost.  But  clearly  he  was  not  part  of  the  canon  in  the  medieval  schools.^ 
In  the  early  Renaissance,  however,  Petrarch  was  well  acquainted  with  his  work, 
and  Salutati  echoed  him.  Boccaccio  read  him  and  introduced  him  into  the  hu- 
manist world  of  Trecento  Florence,  and  Domenico  Bandini  included  him  in 
his  encyclopedia.^ 

The  history  of  the  printed  text  of  Ausonius  at  the  hands  of  Renaissance  ed- 
itors begins  with  Bartholomaeus  Girandinus'  editio  princeps  of  1472,  printed  in 
Venice.  This  was  followed  by  the  edition  of  Julius  Aemilius  Ferrarius  (Milan 
1490),  which  was  reprinted  at  Venice  in  1494  and  reissued  by  Avantius  at  Ve- 
nice in  1496,  thus  making  four  editions  of  printings  from  1472  to  1496,  all 
at  Venice.  There  was  a  Milan  1497  edition  of  the  Ferrarius,  and  next  the  edi- 
tion of  Thaddeus  Ugoletus  at  Parma  in  1499,  which  completes  the  roll  call 
of  incunabula,  a  total  of  six.  This  is  a  respectable  comparison  with  the  figure 
often  incunable  editions  in  Italy  of  Ovid.  Ugoletus'  edition  was  reprinted  at 
Venice  in  1501,  and  it  was  followed  by  an  edition  of  Hieronymus  Avantius 
at  Venice  in  1507.  Thus  an  indication  of  steady  interest  in  Ausonius,  perhaps 
even  a  growing  interest  exists;  it  should  also  be  noted  that  all  of  this  early  print- 
ing history  was  associated  with  Venice  primarily  and  Milan  and  Parma  se- 
condarily, and  that  there  was  a  centering  around  friends  of  Merula  (an  editor 
of  Cicero,  Ovid,  and  Quintilian,  who  taught  in  Milan  and  Pavia  and  discov- 
ered a  manuscript  of  Ausonius  in  the  Church  of  Saint  Eustorgius  at  Milan. )^ 

As  early  as  1472,  Kenney  has  observed,  G.  Merula  deplored  current  stan- 
dards of  editing  (in  the  preface  to  his  edition  of  the  Scriptores  rei  rusticae),  re- 
cording that  these  texts  often  hurried  into  print  for  commercial  reasons  have 
been  "potius  transcursim  et  in  tumultu  perlectos  quam  diligentius  emenda- 
tos.  .  .  ."^  But  there  is  in  the  1499  edition  of  Thaddeus  Ugoletus  (or  Taddeo 
Ugoleto)  some  concern  for  correcting  the  text  of  Ausonius,  in  part  because  he 
had  been  the  student  of  Merula,  in  part  because  he  was  like  his  brother  An- 
gelo,  who  had  edited  the  minor  declamations  of  Quintilian  with  some  care  in 
1494,  and  in  the  preface  to  that  edition  Angelo  showed  an  awareness  that  there 
were  three  types  of  scribal  error:  "cum  trifarie  exemplaria  depraventur,  ap- 
positione  aut  commutatione  aut  subtractione.  .  .  ."^^  This  is  a  clear  and  strong 
indication  that  a  consensus  about  critical  theory,  including  patterns  of  scribal 
errors  and  the  need  to  move  towards  a  more  systematic  theory  of  textual  crit- 
icism, was  taking  shape.  ^* 

The  early  printing  history  of  Ausonius  moves  now  to  Paris,  where  in  1511 
a  remarkable  surge  of  interest  was  manifested.  Two  figures  stand  out,  but  the 
influence  of  two  others  is  unmistakably  strong.  The  two  figures  associated  with 
the  editing  and  teaching  of  Ausonius  in  Paris  at  this  time  are  Michael  Hum- 
melberger  and  Jerome  Aleander,  and  the  two  of  major  influence  are  Erasmus 
and  Lefevre  d'Etaples. 

Jerome  Aleander  (Girolamo  Aleandro,  1480/1-1542)  was  already  involved 
in  editorial  work  for  the  Aldine  Press  at  the  time  of  Erasmus'  arrival  in  Venice 


R.  J.    SCHOECK  139 

early  in  1 508  and  was  of  some  help  in  the  reworking  of  the  Adagia  into  the 
Aldine  edition  of  1508.  By  summer  of  1508  Aleander  had  moved  to  Paris  and 
had  begun  a  series  of  Greek  editions  with  Gilles  de  Gourmont.  He  began  lec- 
turing on  Plutarch  and  continued  on  Lucian  and  Isocrates  in  1509;  in  1511 
his  lectures  on  Ausonius  were  celebrated.*^ 

Aleander  was  a  celebrity  in  Paris  as  a  transmitter  of  Italian  humanist  schol- 
arship into  France  — obviously  now  suddenly  in  vogue  — but  there  was  evi- 
dently something  exciting  about  Ausonius  as  well,  and  two  younger  scholars 
shared  the  love  for  Ausonius.  First  there  was  Michael  Hummelberger 
(1487-1527),  a  young  Swabian  described  by  Bade  as  "Ravensburgensium  lit- 
teratissimo"  who  came  to  Paris  a  little  earlier  than  Aleander,  it  appears,  and 
who  met  Beatus  Rhenaus  and  Lefevre  as  well  as  Bade,  and  then  studied  Greek 
with  Aleander,  while  he  worked  with  Bade  on  the  Historia  Aegesippi  printed  by 
Bade  in  1511.  While  in  Paris  Hummelberger  also  wrote  a  Greek  grammar  that 
was  published  posthumously.  Hummelberger  worked  closely  with  Aleander, 
publishing  an  edition  of  Ausonius,  printed  by  Bade,  in  1511,  and  this  edition 
marked  an  advance  on  the  earlier  work  of  Ugoleto,  the  textus  receptus,  which 
furnished  a  base  for  later  editors.*^  Kenney's  dictum  that  "for  each  author  the 
base  text,  the  lectio  recepta  — the  text  tout  court  — is  the  printed  text,"**  now 
comes  into  play;  and  this  text,  in  Kenney's  words,  is  "now  the  uniquely  stable 
point  of  reference." 

While  printing  at  first  did  not  necessarily  bring  a  qualitatively  superior  the- 
ory or  practice  of  editing  the  received  text,  it  did  succeed  in  stabilizing  the 
text,  with  the  result  that  there  could  now  be  the  multiplication  of  a  number 
of  copies  that  were  nearly  textually  uniform.*^  Just  as  Ugoleto's  1499  version 
of  the  text  had  incorporated  the  work  of  Merula  (1496),  it  in  turn  provided 
a  base  for  future  editors;  and  the  1511  edition  provided  a  base  for  the  work 
of  Richard  Croke.  Croke  (c.  1489-1558),  a  disciple  of  the  so-called  Oxford 
Reformers,  provided  an  important  link  with  German  scholars  while  at 
Leipzig*^  — and  having  worked  with  Aleander,  and  doubtless  having  heard 
Aleander's  Paris  lectures  on  Ausonius,  he  followed  the  order  and  wording  of 
the  1511  Paris  edition  in  his  own  Leipzig  edition  of  1515.* 

The  center  of  studies  for  Ausonius  around  1511  was  clearly  in  Paris,  with 
the  vigorous  publication  enterprise  of  Bade  and  the  friendship  and  support  of 
Erasmus  and  Lefevre.  But  the  center  of  studies,  which  had  already  shifted 
from  Italy  to  Paris,  was  now  to  shift  to  Lyon  and  Bordeaux.*^ 

Following  the  previously  noted  Paris  editions,  there  were  many  editions  of 
individual  works:  the  Precatio  matutina  ad  omnipotentem  Deum,  the  Apophthegmata, 
and  others,  and  there  appeared  increasingly  more  translations  into  French, 
English,  and  other  vernacular  languages.  This  part  of  the  Nachleben  of  Auson- 
ius remains  to  be  recorded  in  complete  detail. 

The  first  edition  of  Elie  Vinet  was  published  in  Pciris  in  1551,  but  the  work 
of  Vinet  is  to  be  located  rather  in  Poitiers,  where  he  received  the  M.A.,  and 


140  THE  EDITING  OF  CLASSICAL  TEXTS  BEFORE  VINET 

in  Bordeaux,  where  he  taught  for  many  years  at  the  College  de  Guyenne,  where 
one  of  his  many  students  was  the  learned  George  Buchanan  and  another  Mon- 
taigne, and  where  he  was  principal  from  1562  until  1587,  the  year  of  his 
death.  ^^  The  edition  of  1551  was  a  carefully  prepared  text  without  a  com- 
mentary, and  this  first  edition  by  Vinet  may  well  be  characterized  as  the  most 
correct  and  most  complete  of  all  of  those  which  had  appeared  since  the  editio 
princeps  of  1472.^^  The  second  edition,  however,  must  be  understood  within 
the  context  of  the  discovery  of  a  new  manuscript  of  Ausonius. 

In  1556  or  1557,  Etienne  Charpin  had  discovered  a  new  manuscript  at  the 
Benedictine  monastery  of  L'lle  Barbe,  near  Lyons,  and  he  rather  quickly  pre- 
pared a  poorly  edited  edition,  published  in  Lyon  in  1558.^^  In  the  margins 
of  his  edition,  Charpinus  reproduced  some  of  the  readings  of  the  newly  dis- 
covered manuscript  (now  known  as  Vossianus  Latinus  111).  Clearly  there  was 
excitement  over  the  discovery  of  the  manuscript,  together  with  an  awareness, 
however  imperfect,  that  there  must  be  a  more  scholarly  critical  response  to 
the  problem  of  the  Ausonian  text;  but  still  the  aim  seems  to  have  been  to  pro- 
vide a  more  readable  text,  rather  than  a  text  to  be  justified  historically  and 
critically. 

Before  considering  more  carefully  the  importance  and  impact  of  the  man- 
uscript  from  L'lle  Barbe,  one  must  take  note  of  another  edition  made  in  1568 
by  Theodorus  Pulmannus  (or  Poelmann),  a  native  of  the  Duchy  of  Cleves  (born 
1511).  The  manuscript  from  L'lle  Barbe  came  into  possession  of  Cujas,  and 
Eli  Vinet  was  able  to  borrow  the  manuscript,  which  travelled  across  France 
during  the  religious  wars;  and  for  several  years  he  worked  at  collating  it.^^  By 
1567  he  completed  a  new  edition  of  Ausonius,  adding  the  additional  poems 
provided  by  the  manuscript  and  using  it  for  better  readings;  he  then  sent  the 
manuscript  to  Gryphius  for  publication  in  Lyon.  For  some  reason  Gryphius 
procrastinated  for  five  years,  and  through  a  mutual  friend,  a  Jacques  Salo- 
mon, Vinet  asked  Scaliger  to  lend  his  influence  with  Gryphius  to  speed  up  pub- 
lication of  Vinet's  edition  of  the  work.^^ 

At  this  point  the  picture  becomes  unclear,  but  it  appears  that  Scaliger  seized 
the  opportunity  of  doing  an  edition  by  himself.  It  is  to  his  credit  that  he  did 
collate  the  manuscript  himself,  recording  readings  into  the  margins  of  Poel- 
man's  1568  edition  (which  is  now  in  the  Bodleian  Library);  however,  it  is 
also  clear  that  he  appropriated  a  great  deal  from  the  work  of  Vinet,  as  he  had 
done  earlier  in  making  use  of  the  work  of  Turnebe  for  his  Coniectanea  on  Var- 
ro's  De  lingua  latinaP  In  the  summer  of  1573  Scaliger  completed  his  version, 
which  with  the  greatest  of  effrontery  he  dedicated  to  Vinet,  even  praising  his 
own  originality  at  the  moment  of  appropriation  of  Vinet's  conjectures.^^  Put- 
ting aside  the  question  of  scholarly  theft,  Scaliger's  work  on  Ausonius  is  hur- 
ried and  careless,  incomplete,  certainly  uneven.  To  be  sure,  as  Grafton  has 
recently  observed,  Scaliger  drew  upon  other  than  literary  sources  for  the  il- 
lumination of  the  text  — inscriptions,  a  knowledge  of  the  topography  of  the  late 


R.  J.    SCHOECK  141 

antique  Gaul,  and  legal  sources.  This  would  justify  Scaliger's  own  claim  made 
later  in  life,  in  1603:  "Alias  non  video,  qua  via  ad  investigandum  verum,  in- 
sistendum  sit,  nisi  integrum  contextum  videro."^^  And  it  is  also  to  be  noted 
that  late  in  life  Scaliger  remained  concerned  with  the  text  of  Ausonius. 

Vinet,  disappointed  by  Gryphius'  unaccountable  and  unconscionable  delay 
in  publishing  his  edition,  could  not  move  as  swiftly  as  Scaliger,  for  he  was  prin- 
cipal of  a  college  and  immersed  not  only  in  administration  but  also  in  pro- 
blems of  maintaining  the  college  during  the  upheavals  of  the  1560's,  1570's  and 
1580's.  Yet  he  continued  not  only  to  teach  but  also  to  edit,  and  he  set  about 
preparing  a  more  scholarly  edition  of  Ausonius,  which  was  finally  published 
by  Simon  Mellanges  in  Bordeaux,  in  1580.  Mellanges  makes  it  clear  that  he 
started  on  the  work  of  publication  in  1575.  The  preface  of  Vinet  is  worth  at- 
tention, for  it  reveals  much  about  the  range  of  his  scholarship  and  the  sources 
for  commentary.  Given  his  honesty,  for  he  credits  everything,  one  is  able  to 
see  more  easily  his  working  procedures  and  his  use  of  materials  than  with  Scal- 
iger, who  concealed  or  falsified  so  much.  In  one  citation  Vinet  links  Beroal- 
dus,  Savellius,  Erasmus,  and  Turnebus  (S3.v),  and  he  seems  to  be  scrupulous 
in  acknowledging  his  intellectual  debts.  More  than  once  he  is  capable  of  say- 
ing nescio  (Dd2v,  Ooo2).  Among  previous  editors  of  Ausonius  he  cites  all  the 
major  ones:  Michael  Hummelberger,  Valentinus,  Erasmus,  Badius,  Turne- 
bus, and  even  Scaliger.  From  the  canon  of  classical  writers  he  cites  Homer, 
Virgil,  Horace,  Ovid,  Terence,  Seneca,  Cicero,  Pliny,  Suetonius,  Donatus  and 
Priscian,  Macrobius,  Diodorus  Siculus,  Boethius,  and  perhaps  most  frequently 
Aulus  Gellius.  From  Renaissance  writers  he  cites  Perottus,  Comes,  Beroal- 
dus,  Vcdla,  Vives,  Tritheim,  Alciatus,  Badius,  Linacre,  Beza,  Bude,  and  above 
all  Erasmus,  and  J.  C.  as  well  as  J.  J.  Scaliger.  But  he  also  cites  the  Church 
Fathers  and  the  New  Testament.  Erasmus  may  well  be  the  most  frequently 
cited  authority,  but  generally  it  is  from  the  Adagia,  where  Vinet  uses  Erasmus' 
interpretation  of  a  proverb  to  elucidate  the  Ausonian  text. 

Here,  in  this  mature  work  of  Elie  Vinet,  is  an  example  of  the  balanced  and 
objective  scholar,  who  strove  for  fairness  and  scholarly  justice.  As  individuals 
one  could  hardly  draw  a  sharper  contrast  than  that  provided  by  the  modest 
and  honest  Vinet,  truly  a  man  of  good  will,  and  the  less  scrupulous  Joseph 
Scaliger.  As  scholar,  Vinet  does  not  have  to  withdraw  from  the  presence  of 
the  celebrated  Sc2diger,  for  Vinet's  erudition  was  equally  wide-ranging,  deal- 
ing with  philology  and  epigraphy  and  also  archaeology,  history,  and  techno- 
logy.^^ Yet  even  while  one  recognizes  that  Scaliger's  editing  of  Ausonius,  like 
much  of  his  early  work,  constituted  a  preparation  for  his  magisterisd  editing 
of  Manilius  and  his  remarkable  Emendatio  Temporum,  one  must  judge  that  Scal- 
iger's work  on  the  text  of  Ausonius  —  even  the  question  of  scholarly  honesty 
aside  — was  not  as  sound  as  that  of  Vinet,  which  remained  the  received  text 
until  the  German  scholarship  of  the  nineteenth  century  (especially  the  work 
of  Karl  Schenkl  and  Rudolf  Peiper).^^ 


142  THE  EDITING  OF  CLASSICAL  TEXTS   BEFORE  VINET 

It  is  a  long  road  from  the  editio  princeps  of  Girardinus  in  1472,  published  only 
a  few  years  after  the  editiones  principes  of  Cicero's  De  Officiis  and  De  Oratore  in 
1465,  and  only  a  year  after  the  editiones  principes  of  Ovid  and  Horace.  If  Ken- 
ney's  generalization  that  the  descent  of  a  given  text  through  the  printed  edi- 
tions is  in  a  single  line  has  a  general  validity,  exceptions  must  be  made  for 
examples  like  the  text  of  Ausonius  which  experienced  delays,  detours  and  dis- 
appointments. Vinet  was  one  whose  standards  of  editing  would  have  given  the 
needed  response  to  Giorgio  Merula's  lament  of  1472  that  editions  were  being 
brought  forward  because  of  printing  and  commercial  pressures.  Many  texts 
were  still  being  produced  by  scholars  of  Vinet's  generation  in  a  debased  form; 
however,  the  example  of  Vinet's  Ausonius  was  not  lost  sight  of,  and  the  scho- 
lar himself  was  remembered  in  the  words  of  Pierre  Paschal  in  a  Tumulus  that 
became  part  of  the  second  edition  of  Vinet's  Ausonius  lovingly  brought  out 
by  Simon  Millanger  in  Bordeaux;  Vinet,  Paschal  declared,  was  "in  omni  fere 
doctrinae  genere  ad  docendum  aptissimus."  For  scholars  are  as  much  remem- 
bered by  their  teaching  as  by  their  published  works. 

The  University  of  Colorado,  Boulder 


Notes 


1.  For  excellent  introductions,  see  L.  D.  Reynolds  and  N.  G.  Wilson,  Scribes  and 
Scholars— A  Guide  to  the  Transmission  of  Greek  and  Latin  Literature,  2d  ed.  (1974;  rptd.  Ox- 
ford, 1978),  esp.  chap.  4;  E.  J.  Kenney,  The  Classical  Text  (Berkeley  and  Los  Angeles, 
1974);  and  S.  Timpanaro,  Die  Entstehung  der  Lachmannschen  Methode,  2d  ed.  (1971)  [an 
enlarged  revision  of  La  genesi  del  metodo  del  Lachmann  ( 1 963)] . 

The  tradition  of  Politian  was  not  lost  in  Italy,  for  it  led  to  the  work  of  Vettori,  Sig- 
onio,  Ursino,  and  Robortello,  and  the  French  all  went  to  Italy  not  only  to  consult  man- 
uscripts but  also  to  study  and  confer  with  these  Italian  scholars. 

2.  See  M.  L.  Clarke,  "  'Non  Hominis  Nomen,  Sed  Eloquentiae,'  "  in  Cicero,  ed.  T. 
A.  Dorey  (London,  1965),  pp.  81-107. 

3.  On  Cicero  in  the  Renaissance,  see  R.  R.  Bolgar  on  Petrarch  and  Cicero,  in  The 
Classical  Heritage  and  Its  Beneficiaries  (Cambridge,  1954),  p.  266  ff. ;  T.  Zielinski,  Cicero 
im  Wandel  der  Jahrhunderte  (Leipzig,  1912);  and,  on  style,  Af.  W.  Croll,  Style,  Rhetoric  and 
Rhythm,  ed.  J.  Max  Patrick  et.  al  (Princeton,  1966). 

4.  Again,  for  an  approach  to  vast  subjects,  see  Gilbert  Highet,  The  Classical  Tradition 
(1949;  rptd.  New  York,  1957),  chaps.  5  and  6. 

5.  There  is  only  one  notice  of  Ausonius  in  Kenney's  Classical  Text,  and  only  two  in 
R.  Pfeiffer,  History  of  Classical  Scholarship  1300-1850  (Oxiord,  1976)  (on  Boccaccio's  get- 
ting hold  of  Ausonius,  and  on  Politian's  work  on  Ausonius).  For  the  Ausonian  tra- 
dition in  the  Middle  Ages  and  early  Renaissance,  see  Roberto  Weiss,  "Ausonius  in  the 
fourteenth  century,"  in  Classical  Influences  on  European  Culture  A.D.  500. 1500  (Cambridge, 
1971),  pp.  67-72. 


R.  J.    SCHOECK  143 

6.  By  this  is  meant  that  he  was  not  a  key  author  in  the  curricular  Ustings  of  uni- 
versity statues. 

7.  See  Weiss,  cited  in  n.  5  above. 

8.  The  data  presented  here  are  drawn  from  the  B.  M.  Catalogues  of  Books  Printed 
in  Italy  and  France.  For  Merula's  discovery,  see  Cosenza,  Italian  Humanists,  5:1171. 

9.  Kenney,  Classical  Text,  p.  17,  citing  V.  Scholderer,  "Printing  at  Venice  to  the  end 
of  1481,"  The  Library  4th  ser.  (1925),  5:129-52. 

10.  Kenney,  Classical  Text,  pp.  28-29. 

1 1 .  An  effort  towards  such  a  systematic  analysis  was  offered  by  Francesco  Robor- 
tello  (1516-1567),  whose  De  arte  sine  ratione  corrigendi  antiquorum  libros  disputation  deals  chiefly 
with  emendation  ex  librorum  auctoritate:  see  Kenney,  Classical  Text,  pp.  29-31. 

For  a  recent  discussion,  see  my  paper  on  "The  Humanistic  Concept  of  the  Text:  Text, 
Context,  and  Tradition,"  in  Proceedings  of  the  PMR  Conference,  1982,  vol.  7  (Villanova, 
Pa.:  Augustinian  Historical  Institute,  1985),  13-31. 

12.  The  story  of  these,  enormously  popular,  is  retold  by  P.  S.  Allen,  in  The  Age  of 
Erasmus  (1914),  pp.  112-13;  see  further  Renaudet,  Prereforme  et  Humanisme.  It  is  re- 
levant that  Ausonius  is  cited  some  29  times  in  the  Adagia  of  1508,  very  nearly  the  same 
number  of  times  that  Catullus  and  Donatus  were  cited  (30  each):  see  M.  M.  Phillips, 
The  Adages  of  Erasmus  (Cambridge,  1964). 

13.  On  Michael  Hummelberger,  see  further  A.  Horowitz,  Michael  Hummelberger,  eine 
biographische  Skizze  (Berlin,  1875). 

The  term  textus  receptus  dates  from  the  Elzevier  edition  of  1633  and  apparently  is  due 
to  Daniel  Heinsius:  see  Kenney,  The  Classical  Text,  p.  69  n.  (citing  H.  J.  de  Jonge, 
Daniel  Heinsius  and  the  Textus  Receptus  of  the  New  Testament  [1971]). 

"With  remarkably  few  exceptions,"  Kenney  adds,  "the  descent  of  any  given  text  through 
the  printed  editions  is  in  a  single  line,  and  each  editor  is  found  to  base  his  work  on 
that  of  his  (usually  though  not  invariably)  immediate  predecessor":  Classical  Text, 
p.  18. 

14.  Classical  Text,  p.  18. 

15.  Early  printed  books  were  never  completely  uniform  textually,  owing  to  stop- 
press  correcting  that  seems  to  have  been  the  more  frequent  and  more  normal  the  more 
expensive  or  important  the  book  was:  see  Kenney,  Classical  Text,  p.  19,  where  he  as- 
sumes, without  show  of  evidence,  that  stop-press  correction  and  mixing  of  sheets  "is 
a  potent  source  of  textual  and  bibliographical  confusion  [more  in  vernacular  literature] 
rather  than  classical  texts." 

But  the  subject  is  more  complex:  for  a  statement  of  basic  theory  concerning  press- 
correction,  see  Fredson  T.  Bowers,  Principles  of  Bibliographical  Description  (Princeton,  1949), 
chap.  2. 

16.  Contemporaries  of  Erasmus,  Collected  Works  of  Erasmus,  ed.  P.  Bietenholz  (To- 
ronto, 1985),  1:359;  d  D.N.B  for  dates  of  Oxford  degrees. 

17.  After  Paris,  Croke  had  gone  to  teach  Greek  in  Louvain  2md  Cologne,  and  from 
there  he  went  to  Leipzig  for  further  study  but  "taught  Greek  in  1516  in  response  to 
a  request  from  the  Faculty"  {Contemporaries  of  Erasmus,  1 :359,  citing  Erasmus'  Ep.  415), 
and  in  1516  he  published  both  a  Tabulae  graecas  literas  .  .  .  and  a  translation  of  the  fourth 
book  of  Gaza's  Greek  grammar.  The  entry  in  Contemporaries  of  Erasmus  notes  that  "while 
in  Germany  Croke  came  into  contact  with  many  German  scholars,  notably  Ulrich  von 
Hutten  and  Johann  Reuchlin.  Johannes  Camerarius  was  one  of  his  pupils,  and  Con- 
radus  Mutianus  wrote  of  Croke's  visit  with  him,  remarking  that  the  visitor  was  'more 
Greek  than  English.'  In  1519  Croke  corresponded  with  Guillaume  Bude  in  Greek." 

18.  As  well  as  the  editorial  work  of  Merula  and  Ugoleto  already  remarked,  one  may 


144  THE  EDITING  OF  CLASSICAL  TEXTS  BEFORE  VINET 

note  the  philological  investigations  of  Politian  and  Beroaldo:  see  Grafton,  Scaliger,  p. 
237,  notes  56-58. 

19.  Thus  Paul  Courteault  in  Diet.  Lettres  Frangaises. 

20.  H.  de  la  Ville  de  Mirmont,  Le  Manuscrit  de  I'lle  Barbe  (Codex  Leidensis  Vossianus 
Latinus  111)  et  les  travaux  de  la  critique  sur  le  text  d'Ausone.  L'oeuvre  de  Vinet  et  I'oeuvre  de  Scal- 
iger. 3  vols.  (Paris  and  Bordeaux,  1917-19),  1:38.  I  have  discussed  this  important  but 
neglected  work  briefly  in  Classical  Journal,  80  (1985),  360-1.  and  in  the  "Humanistic 
Text,"  n.  44. 

21.  Ibid.  Pulmann  tells  us  in  the  dedication  of  his  edition  of  Ausonius  that  "he  was 
urged  by  Plantin  to  edit  an  emended  text":  an  important  indication  both  of  the  general 
awareness  of  the  felt  need  for  a  more  accurate  text  of  Ausonius  and  also  a  valuable  clue 
to  the  role  of  the  scholar-printers  in  initiating  such  editions. 

22.  de  la  Ville  de  Mirmont,  1:38. 

23.  Ibid. 

2i.  Grafton,  Scaliger,  p.  129. 

25.  Grafton,  Scaliger,  p.  107. 

26.  Grafton,  Scaliger,  p.  129. 

27.  Grafton,  Scaliger,  p.  131;  Epistolae  {l^cid^n,  1627),  Ep.  CCXXIV  to  M.  Frehero 
(sig.  Hh). 

28.  Among  his  publications  one  notes,  e.g.,  his  edition  of  the  Somnium  Scipionis  (Bor- 
deaux, 1579),  an  edition  of  Eutropius  (Bordeaux,  1580),  of  Priscian  (1565),  of  Proclus 
(Poitiers,  1544),  a  Vie  de  Charlemagne  (Poitiers,  1546),  and  a  edition  of  Theognis  (Paris, 
1543).  See  H.  de  la  Ville  de  Mirmont,  1:3  ff. ,  and  Paul  Courteault  in  Diet.  Lettres  Fran- 
gaises, and  Courteault,  "Elie  Vinet,"  in  A  la  memoire  du  Saintongeais  Elie  Vinet,  publie  a 
I'oceasion  du  400ieme  anniversaire  de  sa  naissance  (Barbezieux,  1910),  pp.  95-120. 

29.  Karl  Schenkle,  Mon.  Germ.  Hist. ,  Auctores  Antiquissimi,  5.ii  (Berlin,  1883);  and 
Rudolf  Peiper,  Teubner  Series  (Leipzig,  1886). 


Ein  unbekanntes  Jesuitendrama 

iiber  loannes  Dantiscus 

aus  dem  18.  Jahrhundert 

Jerzy  Starnawski 

Im  Jahre  1731  wurde  auf  dem  Schultheater  der  Jesuiten  in  Wilna  oder 
in  Polock  ein  Drama  aufgefiihrt,  das  den  polnisch-lateinischen  Dichter 
loannes  Dantiscus  aus  dem  16.  Jahrhundert  zum  Gegenstand  hatte.  Der 
Verfasser  dieses  Dramas  ist  uns  nicht  bekannt,  sehr  wahrscheinUch  war  es  ein 
Jesuitenpriester  des  Kollegs  Wilna  oder  Polock.  Der  Text  des  Stiicks  ist  nicht 
erhalten  geblieben,  doch  besitzt  die  Jagellonische  Bibliothek  zu  Krakau  we- 
nigstens  eine  gedruckte  Perioche  von  4  Seiten  Umfang,  in  der  die  Handlung 
kurz  zusammengefafit  ist.  Diese  Perioche  hat  Karol  Estreicher  in  seinem  Rie- 
senwerk  Bibliographia  polska  (Polnische  Biblio graphic)  verzeichnet,  doch  weder  er 
noch  ein  anderer  Erforscher  der  Geschichte  des  polnischen  Dramas  hat  bis  zum 
Jahre  1973  nachgeweisen,  wer  in  diesem  Drama  hinter  dem  Namen  loannes 
steckt.  Erst  dem  1975  verstorbenen  Gelehrten  Andrzej  Wojtkowski  gelang  die 
Identifizierung  des  Helden,  die  er  mir  in  einem  Brief  des  Jahres  1973  mitteilte. 
Ich  habe  die  Entdeckung  meines  Lehrers  Wojtkowski  in  einer  polnischen 
Zeitschrift^  besprochen  und  mochte  sie  heute  meinen  internationalen  Kolle- 
gen  vorstellen. 

Das  Drama  hatte  drei  Aufziige.  Die  Hauptgestalt  war  ein  loannes,  der  im 
Jahre  1525  vom  polnischen  Konig  Sigismund  I.  als  Botschafter  zu  Kaiser  Karl 
V.  gesandt  wurde  und  vom  Kaiser  (der  ja  zugleich  spanischer  Konig  war)  den 
Titel  eines  spanischen  Granden  erhielt.  Es  handelt  sich  hier  zweifellos  um  den 
Dichter  loannes  Dantiscus.  Wir  kennen  zwar  nur  die  Inhaltsangabe,  doch  sie 
erlaubt  uns,  etwas  iiber  die  Struktur  des  Werkes  zu  sagen. 

Da  das  Stiick  von  den  Schiilern  des  JesuitenkoUegs  aufgefiihrt  wurde,  gibt 
es  darin  keine  Frauengestalten.  Das  Werk  hat  einen  tief  polnischen  Charakter; 
merkwiirdigerweise  tragt  der  Sekretar  des  Botschafters  den  schwer  zu  lati- 
nisierenden  Namen  Chrz^szcz.  Das  Drama  beginnt  mit  einem  Prolog,  in  dem, 
wie  iiblich,  das  Thema  angekiindigt  wird.  Bevor  loannes,  die  Hauptgestalt, 
die  Wiirde  eines  Gesandten  ("orator")  iibertragen  bekommt,  hat  er  ein  Traum- 
gesicht  von  einem  grofien  Turm,  der  ihm  auf  die  Schultern  fallt  und  dort  lie- 
gen  bleibt.  Der  Vers 


146  EIN   UNBEKANNTES  JESUITENDRAMA 

Incumbet  humeris  hie  brevi  Turris  tuis 

wird  zum  Refrain  und  Leitmotiv  des  Dramas.  Es  wird  deutlich  gemacht,  dafi 
dieser  Vers  den  Triumph  wie  auch  einen  voriibergehenden  Sturz  des  Prota- 
gonisten  darstellt.  Diese  Vermischung  von  Motiven  des  Triumphes  und  des 
Sturzes  wahrend  des  Gesandtendienstes  von  Dantiscus  verleiht  dem  Stuck  eine 
lebhafte  Spannung.  Der  Ubergang  vom  Triumph  zur  Niederlage  und  von  der 
Niederlage  zum  Triumph  begegnet  in  der  modernen  europaischen  Dramatik 
des  17.  und  18.  Jahrhunderts  haufig.  Es  geniigt  hier,  an  Moliere's  Tartuffe 
zu  erinnern. 

Am  Beginn  des  ersten  Aufzuges  sehen  wir  Karl  V.  nach  seinem  glanzenden 
Sieg  iiber  Frankreich  triumphieren,  und  loannes  wird,  dem  Geprage  der  klas- 
sizistischen  modernen  Dramatik  gemafi,  als  ausgezeichneter  Dichter  und  Red- 
ner  vorgestellt.  Um  bedeutungsvoUe  Ereignisse  zu  haufen,  hat  der  Verfasser 
im  Drama  einige  bewufite  Anderungen  des  tatsachlichen  geschichtlichen 
Ablaufs  vorgenommen.  Historische  Ereignisse  aus  verschiedenen  Jahren  werden 
auf  ein  einziges  Jahr  zusammengedrangt.  Karls  V.  Sieg  iiber  Franz  I.,  den 
Konig  von  Frankreich,  dessen  Gefangennahme,  die  Entsendung  des  Botschaf- 
ters  Dantiscus  von  Sigismund  I.  von  Polen  zu  Karl  V.  und  die  Verleihung 
der  Grandenwiirde  an  Dantiscus  fallen  in  das  Jahr  1525.  Die  Botschaft  Karls 
V.  an  Sigismund  I.  in  der  Sache  des  Kreuzritterordens  gehort  dagegen  schon 
in  das  Jahr  1520.  Unser  Verfasser  verlegt  alle  erwahnten  Ereignisse  in  dieses 
Jahr,  aber  er  verzeichnet  die  richtigen  Daten  in  einer  Fufinote,  in  der  er  die 
Annalen  von  Jan  Kwiatkiev^icz  erwahnt.  Es  handelt  sich  also  nicht  um  ein  Ver- 
sehen,  sondern  um  eine  bewufite  Veranderung  der  historischen  Wahrheit  zu- 
gunsten  der  dramatischen  Gestaltung. 

Die  Szene,  in  der  Kaiser  Karl  V.  den  Dichter  mit  seinem  eigenen  Lorbeer- 
kranz  kront,  ist  ein  Hymnus  zu  Ehren  der  Dichtung. 

Eine  Kabale  hat  der  Dichter  in  sein  Drama  eingewoben.  Hugo  verfallt,  als 
ihm  klar  wird,  dafi  nicht  er  selber,  sondern  der  Gesandte  loannes  (in  den  Augen 
des  Kaisers  "bene  meritus")  die  unbesetzte  Stelle  eines  Granden  einnehmen 
soil,  der  Eifersucht,  die  ihn  bis  zum  mifilungenen  Mordanschlag  treibt.  In  seiner 
Wut,  den  Rivalen  nicht  losgeworden  zu  sein,  schmaht  er  den  polnischen  Ge- 
sandten  und  verdachtigt  ihn  geheimer  Umtriebe  mit  dem  gefangenen  franzo- 
sischen  Konig.  Es  gelingt  ihm  voriibergehend,  das  Vertrauen  des  Kaisers  zu 
gewinnen,  der  den  Befehl  gibt,  loannes  bis  zu  seiner  Abfahrt  gefangen  zu  setzen, 
um  einer  Verschworung  vorzubeugen.  So  erhalt  der  "Turm"  ("Turris")  in  die- 
sem  Drama  eine  doppelte  Bedeutung:  er  symbolisiert  zum  einen  das  Gefangnis 
(entsprechend  dem  soeben  referierten  Geschehen)  und  zum  andem  die  Erhoh- 
ung  in  der  Szene,  in  der  dem  Dichter  der  Lorbeer  verliehen  wird.  Mehrmals 
wird,  als  "Refrain,"  der  Vers  wiederholt: 

Incumbet  humeris  hie  brevi  Turris  tuis. 


JERZY  STARNAWSKI  I47 

Die  Gefangenschaft  des  loannes  dauert  nur  kurze  Zeit.  Hugos  frevelhafte  Um- 
triebe  kommen  ans  Licht,  als  ihm  in  Gegenwart  des  Kaisers  das  Schwert 
entfallt,  mit  dem  er  loannes  toten  wollte.  Dessen  Gedicht  zu  Ehren  des  Kai- 
sers beseitigt  den  letzten  Verdacht.  Die  Situation  verandert  sich:  Hugo  wird 
ins  Gefangnis  geworfen,  loannes  dem  Kaiser  vorgefiihrt.  Dieser  klagt  sich 
selber  an,  dem  Verleumder  Glauben  geschenkt  zu  haben,  und  huldigt  mit  sei- 
nem  Gefolge  dem  Gesandten  aus  dem  fernen  Norden  als  einem  grofien  Dich- 
ter  und  Redner.  Das  Stiick,  das  mit  einer  Szene  des  Waffentriumphs  begonnen 
hat,  endet  mit  einer  Szene  des  Triumphs  fur  die  Dichtung.  Der  Dichter  wird 
zum  Symbol  der  Uberlegenheit  der  Geisteskultur  iiber  die  politische  Macht. 

Die  Perioche  iiberliefert  keine  Zitate  aus  Werken  des  Dantiscus,  und  es  bleibt 
offen,  ob  der  Text  solche  Zitate  enthielt.  Wir  wissen  wenig  iiber  seine  formale 
Gestalt.  Mit  Bestimmtheit  aber  kann  man  sagen,  dafi  der  Verfasser  dieses  nur 
in  einer  summarischen  Inhaltsangabe  erhaltenen  Stiicks  dramatisches  Talent 
hatte.  Er  hat  die  Biographie  des  polnisch-lateinischen  Dichters  in  lebendige 
Szenen  gefafit  und  die  moderne  Dramatik,  die  er  kannte,  sich  zunutze  gemacht. 

Das  hier  vorgestellte  Drama,  das  so  lange  vergessen  war,  verdient  Beach- 
tung  als  ein  Dokument  des  Ruhms  von  loannes  Dantiscus  und  als  Exempel 
der  polnischen  Theaterkultur.  Die  Perioche,  die  ich  zum  Abschlufi  meines  Auf- 
satzes  in  der  oben  erwahnten  polnischen  Zeitschrift  veroffentlichte,  soil  hier 
folgen: 

Legatus  a  corde  Sarmatiae  vox  clamantis  Joannes  extra  Desertum,  ora- 
toriis  in  rostris  disertus,  olim  a  Coronato  Poloni  Poli  Principe  Sigismundo 
I  ad  Romani  Imperii  Augustum  Carolum  V  expeditus  et  ab  eodem  at- 
tollentibus  Eloquentiae  et  Scientiae  alis  in  grandem  grandium  Hispa- 
niae  dignitatem  elatus,  nunc  a  Perillustri,  Illustri  ac  Magnifica  Ligatae 
Eloquentiae  Juventute  Regio  Bathoreani  Athenaei  Societatis  Jesu  eodem 
titulo  in  capite  anni  coronata  e  mortalitatis  cineribus  in  prototypon  et 
metam  metagymnastici  actus  dramaticis  vinculis  productus.  Anno  Le- 
gati  de  Coelo  in  terras  pro  nostra  salute  descendentis  1731,  Pridie  Ka- 
lendas  Augusti. 


Argumentum 

Nunquam  gloriosius  incedunt  Mercurii,  quam  si  Eloquii  et  Scientiae  instructi 
alis  a  Coronatis  Terrarum  Numinibus  e  patrio  coelo  in  alienum  expediantur. 
Palpare  libet  hanc  veritatem  in  Joanne,  tam  Polono  quam  Ausonio  Orbi  caro 
Legato,  Sigismundi  primi  Poloniarum  Regis,  ad  Carolum  V  expedito,  qui  fluida 
facundia  et  rara  scientia  ita  dilectus  evasit  Carolo,  ut  eum  grandem  Hispaniae 
(qui  summus  honor  est)  creaverit.  Penziger  in  4.  Mund.  Monarch.  Comp.  dis- 
cur.  IV.  Histor.  4. 


148  EIN   UNBEKANNTES  JESUITENDRAMA 

Prologus 

Genius  Joannis  legationis  charactere  accinctus  viae,  Morpheum  in  itinere 
legens,  videt  grandem  Turrim  in  suos  prolabi  humeros,  in  iisque  recumbere. 

Interludium 


Actus  primus 

Scaena  prima.  Carolus  V  onustus  trophaeis  victrici  praecinctus  laurea  cap- 
tive praeeunte  Francisco  Galliae  rege,  /a/  summo  cum  triumpho  ingreditur 
senatum,  ubi  occupato  solio,  mandat  Franciscum  custodiae,  ipse  vero  salutat 
proceres  a  quibus  etiam  solennibus  attoUitur  applausibus  et  Pater  Patriae  de- 
clamatur. 

Scaena  secunda.  Volante  adhuc  per  aera  plausu  subit  senatum  Hugo,  le- 
gatus  a  Carolo  ad  regem  Sforciae  /b/  expeditus  datque  nuntium  ab  Hispanis 
iterum  reliquos  rebelles  victos  esse  Gallos,  in  quo  conflictu  etiam  primum  ex 
primoribus  grandibus  Hispaniae  occubuisse. 

Scaena  tertia.  Laetus  Carolus  hoc  nuntio,  pacatumque  suum  iam  videns  reg- 
num,  statuit  expedire  legatum  ad  Sigismundum  Poloniarum  monarcham,  ut 
supplicantem  sibi  Theutonum  Ordinem  ad  pacis  foedera  cum  Sigismundo  in- 
ducat.  Id 

Scaena  quarta.  Supervenit  unus  e  proceribus  nuntians  e  Polonia  venisse  le- 
gatum, quo  nuntio  Carolus  accepto,  iubet  totum  senatum  obviam  ire,  solo  suo 
lateri  adhaerente  Hugone. 

Scaena  quinta.  Ingressus  Joannes  senatum,  orditur  victorias  Caroli,  laurea 
decorare  linguae,  totusque  in  encomia  Caesaris  fluidissimae  orationis  effun- 
ditur  flumine.  Victus  Carolus  Joannis  facundia,  victricem  herbam  de  suo  ca- 
piens  capite,  Joannis  coronat  verticem,  subiiciens: 

Incumbet  humeris  hie  brevi  Turris  tuis. 

Librumque  de  statu  Regni  Hispaniae  porrigit,  quem  evolvendum 
commendat. 


Chorus  primus 

In  Genium  Joannis  immersum  libro  irruit  Genius  Hugonis,  ut  eum 
e  libro  deleat  viventium,  sed  Genius  Joannis  ictum  calami  ferrei  oppos- 
itione  voluminis  eludit. 


JERZY  STARNAWSKI  I^g 

Interludium 
Actus  secundus 

Scaena  prima.  Hugo  aegro  ferens  animo  advenam  Joannem,  nullis  praeviis 
meritis  sic  honorari,  sibi  vero  pro  tot  legationibus  cum  molestia  susceptis  nihil 
simile  praestari,  Acheronta  movet  contra  Caesarem,  sed  haec  adhuc  mitigat, 
spe  succedendi  in  locum  defuncti  grandis  Hispaniae.  lUud  vero  maxime  ob- 
servat  Caroli  ad  Joannem  dictum:  Incumbet  humeris  etc.  etc.  cum  serio  scru- 
tatur,  reperit  in  via  nudum  gladium,  quem  dum  attolit,  oculisque  perlustrat, 
advertit  inaratum: 

Erit  gladius  hie  clavis  ad  Turrim  tibi. 

Anceps  contentorum,  tam  in  Caesaris  effato,  quam  in  epigraphe  gladii  sta- 
tuit  adire  Meringum. 

Scaena  secunda.  Meringus  properans  ad  senatum  obviat  Hugoni,  quaeritque, 
quem  evaginato  expectaret  gladio,  cui  Hugo  reponit  se  invenisse  in  via  du- 
biumque  haerere  super  perplexitate  inscriptionis.  Quaerit  ergo  Meringum,  quid 
sonaret  illud  Caesaris:  Incumbet  humeris  etc.  Meringus,  vir  ingenii  acutis- 
simi,  sciens  Hugonem  bene  meritum  esse  de  Caesare,  dicit:  indicari  sibi  al- 
iquam  grandem  dignitatem  in  Hispania,  his  verbis  "Incumbet  humeris  Turris," 
a  stemmate  Turrium  Hispaniae.  Ad  epigraphen  vero  gladii,  respondet,  si  qui 
obices  reperirentur,  hoc  gladio  essent  amovendi;  similiter  disserens:  Clavis  ad 
Turrim  etc. 

Scaena  tertia.  Commotus  priori  explicatione  Hugo,  quod  praeter  summa 
signa,  favoris,  etiam  hie  Joanni  promitteretur  honor,  (quem  sibi  dari  certo  spe- 
rabat)  exhilaratur  posteriori,  quod  sublato  e  vivis  Joanne  tanquzim  obice,  sit 
ilium  capturus.  Et  ubi  meditatur  de  modo  tollendi,  cernit  Ephebum  prope- 
rantem  ad  Theonem  unum  ex  senatoribus,  quem  agnoscens  esse  Joannis, 
quaerit:  sit  ne  quis  apud  Joannem;  respondente  Ephebo:  solum  in  conclavi 
volvere  librum,  capit  animum  eum  adeundi  et  insperate  occidendi. 

Scaena  quarta.  Suspenso  pede  intrat  Hugo  palatium,  ubi  videns  solum  Joan- 
nem in  conclavi  immersum  libro,  uno  aggreditur  ictu,  sed  Joannes  imperter- 
rito  animo,  sine  ulla  sui  laesione,  ilium  libro  tanquam  clypeo  eludit,  solum 
media  voluminis  confossa  parte.  Inaudiens  vero  strepitum  advenientum  Chr^sci 
secretarii  Joannis  et  Ephebi  Francisci  regis,  cum  litteris  ad  Joannem,  ab  ul- 
teriori  abstinet  ictu.  Ne  autem  suspicionem  intentatae  relinqueret  caedis,  sim- 
ulat  haec  fieri  a  se  ex  confidentia,  ut  experimento  probet,  utrum  Poloni  sint 
ita  generosi  animi,  prout  per  aures  feruntur. 

Scaena   quinta.    Egressus   a  Joanne   Hugo,   agitatur   furiis,    quod   opti- 


150  EIN   UNBEKANNTES  JESUITENDRAMA 

mam  nactus  occasionem,  suis  non  satisfecerit  votis,  quare  calumniosa  perdendi 
iam  Joannem  incedit  via.  Intrat  enim  senatum  referens  Carolo,  quoad  Joannes, 
immemor  gratiarum,  cum  Francisco  moliatur  contra  Caesarem.  Alteratus  Cae- 
sar iubet  Joannem  duci  ad  Turrim,  /d/  vigilantique  circumdari  milite,  ut  ibi 
sub  honesta  teneatur  custodia  antequam  in  Polonia  expediatur,  ne  aliquas  cum 
Francisco  ageret  pactiones.  Librumque  a  se  datum  referri  iubet,  cuius  rei  spar- 
tham  committit  Theoni. 


Chorus  secundus 

Genius  Hugonis  dum  grandem  lapidem  velut  alter  Sisyphus  in  caput  Genii 
attolit  Joannis,  ipse  eodem  desuper  cadente  obruitur. 


Interludium 


Actus  tertius 

Scaena  prima.  Joannes  calumniarum  sibi  obiectarum  ignarus  properat  ad 
senatum  sed  in  ipso  limine  aulae  ab  obvio  sibi  Theone  cum  manipulo  militum 
detinetur  iubeturque  statim  palatio  exesse  et  conferre  se  ad  arcem  dictam  Tur- 
rim. Admiratus  Joannes  inopinam  vicissitudinem  pergit  in  assistentia  custo- 
diae  militaris  in  arcem,  quam  subiens  recolit  illud  Caesaris  dictum  verificari: 
Incumbet  humeris  etc.  Theones  vero  indolens  eius  infortunio  (erat  enim  ami- 
cissimus)  petit  reddi  librum  quem  a  Carolo  acceperat,  ut  eum  illi  referat,  quem 
casu  aperiens  incidit  in  folia  perforata,  quaerit,  utrum  talem  acceperit.  Sed 
a  Joanne  edocetur  Hugonem  gladio  perfodisse,  totaque  series  rei  narratur. 

Scaena  secunda.  Properans  Theones  cum  accepto  libro,  invenit  in  area  arcis 
codicem,  ingenio  et  erudita  Joannis  manu  concinnatum,  quem  ubi  perlustrat, 
videt  cultissime  heroico  carmine  Caroli  decantari  victorias.  Ingressus  aulam 
offert  Carolo  librum,  refertque  medietatem  esse  ab  Hugone  perfixam,  Joan- 
nem vero  sola  invidia  esse  delatum  eo  quod  a  Maiestate  gratiis  cumularetur 
advena  legatus,  non  vero  Caesaris  Hugo.  Ut  etiam  omnem  deleat  suspicio- 
nem,  porrigit  libellum  Joannis.  Carolus  relecto  pauco  carmine,  summe  de- 
lectatus,  iubet  ex  nunc  ad  se  duci  Hugonem. 

Scaena  tertia.  Adducto  Hugoni  in  aulam  exprobrat  laesionem  Carolus  libri 
et  intentatae  caedis  Joanni.  Hugo  ubi  prosternitur  ad  plantas,  excidit  gladius, 
quem  sub  pallio  semper  portabat.  Exasperatus  Carolus  nova  suspicione,  nonne 
etiam  suae  Hugo  insidietur  vitae,  iubet  e  terra  levari  gladium,  quem  attoUens 
Theones  manifestat  innocentiam  Joannis  et  malitiam  proditam  Hugonis.  Cae- 
sar versans  gladium  ubi  incidit  in  illud:  "Erit  gladius  hie  clavis  ad  Turrim  tibi" 


JERZY  STARNAWSKI  I5I 

Turri  includi  iubet  /e/,  ad  Joannem  vero  totam  expedit  aulam,  ad  se  invitan- 
dum. 

Scaena  quarta.  Illachrymatur  Hugo  suo  infortunio,  quod  pro  Turribus  His- 
paniae,  per  quas  intelligebat  grandem  grandium  dignitatem,  gladius  evaserit 
clavis  ad  perpetui  carceris  turrim,  ingeminansque  illud:  "Erit  gladius  hie  ela- 
vis  ad  Turrim  tibi"  infert  in  ergastulum  pedes. 

Scaena  quinta.  Vix  praetergresso  limina  regiae  Joanni  Carolus  obvius  oc- 
curit,  suam  cito  credulam  accusans  aurem.  Ut  autem  moestum  exhilaret  Joan- 
nem, iubet  festivas  satyros  celebrare  choreas.  Finito  vero  saltu  in  praemium 
erudite  compositi  hbri,  grandem  creat  Hispaniae  et  quae  dignitas  aenigmate 
hucusque  obscurabatur:  Incumbet  humeris  hie  brevi  Turris  gratulatoris  tuis, 
iam  totius  senatus  gratulatorio  illustratur  ore. 


Epilogus 

Bathoreana  Pallas  Genium  Joannis  cernens  Eloquentiae  et  Scientiae  suffra- 
gio,  grandibus  annumerari  Hispaniae,  candidatorum  nomina,  in  Domo  Sa- 
pientiae  ad  altiores  promovet  honores.  Post  impositas  vero  emeritis  capitibus 
coronas,  annuae  legationi  et  scaenico  actui  coronidem. 

Ad  M.  D.  T.  O.  M.  G.  B.  V.  M.  S.  L.  O.  C.  H.  nee  non  S.P.N.  Ignatii 
venerationem. 

/a/  P.  Kwiatkiewicz  in  Annal.  Anno  1525. 

/b/  Idem  ibidem. 

Id  Idem  ibidem  Anno  1520. 

/d/  Arx  dicta  fuit  Romae  Turris.  Baron. 

Id  Turres  Romae  dicebantur:  perpetui  carceres.  P.  Kwiatkiewicz. 


Anmerkung 


1.  J.  Starnawski,  "Dantiscana,"  in:  Komunikaty  Marzursko  —  Warminskie  1977,  Nr.  2 
(136),  177-96. 


Neulateinische  lyrische  Dichtung  im  Ungarn  des 
18.  Jahrhunderts  und  die  antike  Tradition 

Ldszlo  Szorenyi 

In  Ungarn  wurde  eine  lateinische  dichterische  Schule  im  17.  Jahrhundert 
vor  allem  von  den  Jesuiten  ins  Leben  gerufen.  Das  osterreichische  und 
ungarische  Gebiet  bildete  eine  gemeinsame  Jesuitenordensprovinz;  erst 
zu  Beginn  des  18.  Jahrhunderts  wurde  ein  Jesuitenkollegium  in  Szakolca  er- 
richtet,  das  seine  Hauptaufgabe  in  der  Wiederholung  der  Humaniora  ("re- 
petitio  humaniorum")  sah;  spater  wurde  eine  weitere  solche  Schule  auch  im 
grofien  westungarischen  Bischofssitz  zu  Gyor  (Raab)  gegriindet.  Gliicklicher- 
weise  bUeb  uns  aus  dem  von  der  Mitte  des  18.  Jahrhunderts  (1742-1773)  stam- 
menden  Schriftgut  dieses  Instituts  von  Gyor  Materiad  von  cirka  einem 
Vierteljahrhundert  erhalten,  aufgrund  dessen  verhaltnismafiig  genau  rekon- 
struiert  werden  kann,  nach  welchen  Prinzipien,  unter  Beriicksichtigung  welcher 
poetischen  Vorschriften  und  durch  die  Imitation  welcher  antiken  Vorbilder 
die  Jesuiten  ihre  Schiiler  die  Verfassung  lateinischer  Gedichte  lehrten.  Zum 
Beispiel  ist  Mihaly  Paintners  (1753-1826)  Ovid-Nachahmung  iiber  Phaeton 
aus  den  Metamorphoses  II.  I  iiberliefert. 

Magna  petis  Phaeton,  nimium  temerarius  annis 

Incautis,  vitae  prodigus  ipse  tuae 
Nondum  sunt  tantae  juvenili  in  corpore  vires 

Non  vigor  tanto  congruus  officio. 
Sors  tua  mortalis;  plus  quam  mortale  teneto, 

incestis  cujus  tanta  cupido  tui. 
Nescius  affectas,  quod  nee  contingere  cuiquam 

Possit,  qui  teneat  regna  beata  Poli. 
Cuique  Ucet  placeat,  rapidas  agitare  quadrigas 

ignifero  qui  tamen  nullus  in  axe  valet. 
Qui  fera  terribiU  jaculatur  fulmina  dextra 

non  isthos  currus  Jupiter  ipsus  agat. 
Et  quid  in  hoc  orbis  spatio  Jove  majus  habetur? 


154  NEULATEINISCHE  LYRISCHE  DICHTUNG   IN   UNGARN 

Scilicet  haec  soli  credita  cura  mihi  est. 
Ardua  prima  via  est  fessi  qua  vixque  recenter 

viribus  instructi  mane  feruntur  equi, 
Alta  nimis  media  est,  et  per  sublimia  ducens 

Unde  mare  et  terras  saepe  videre  placet. 
Sed  timeo,  et  pavida  trepidat  formidine  pectus, 

Ultima,  quae  praeceps,  indiget  arte  via.  .  .  } 

Nach  dem  Gedicht  sind  die  kritischen  Anmerkungen  des  betreuenden 
Lehrers,  Franz  Xaver  Muthsam,  zu  lesen.  Zum  Beispiel  bemerkte  er  im  Zu- 
sammenhang  mit  den  Zeilen  13-14:  "Dieser  Satz  hier  ist  — von  den  anderen 
getrennt  —  sehr  ungliicklich.  Bei  Ovid  folgt  er  aus  der  Natur  der  Sache  und 
kniipft  sich  an  die  anderen." 

Ovid  und  Vergil  zahlten  zu  den  Leitsternen  der  Jesuitendichtung— natiirlich 
neben  solchen  neulateinischen  Dichtern  wie  Jacobus  Balde,  Sidronius  Hos- 
schius,  Owenus,  Sarbievius  usw.  Die  Jesuiten  brachten  vor  allem  eine  epische 
Dichtung,  zunachst  in  der  Manier  der  Ovidischen  Metamorphoses,  spater  immer 
mehr  im  Bann  der  Aeneis  hervor.^  Etwa  in  der  Mitte  des  Jahrhunderts  er- 
scheinen  auch  ihre  ersten  lyrischen  Sammlungen.  Der  bekannteste  Lyriker  unter 
ihnen  ist  Pal  Mako  (1724-1793),  der  spater  namhafter  Mathematiker  wur- 
de.  Sein  Band  unter  dem  Titel  Carminum  libri  tres  erschien  1764  in  Nagyszom- 
bat  (Tyrnau).^  In  der  ersten  Elegie  des  ersten  Buches  entschuldigt  er  sich 
gleichsam  dafiir,  dafi  er  kein  episches,  sondern  ein  lyrisches  Thema  gewahlt 
hat.  Seine  dort  personifizierte  Elegie  tadelt  den  Dichter  dafiir  und  fordert  ihn 
auf,  im  Erstlingswerk  seines  dichterischen  Schaffens  ihr  zu  huldigen: 

Da  mihi  primitias  operum:  grauioribus  olim 

Cantibus  heroum  (nil  moror)  acta  canas. 
Adprobo  dicta  deae;  tacito  sed  cura  recursat 
Materiae,  numeris  quae  foret  apta  meis.* 

Sie  iiberzeugt  den  zogernden  Dichter,  dafi  nicht  nur  das  "perpetuum  car- 
men," das  heifit  das  Epos,  sondern  auch  die  lyrischen  Stiicke,  welche  Ovid 
und  TibuU  schrieben,  geeignet  sind,  dem  Dichter  poetischen  Ruhm  zu  ver- 
schaffen.  Pal  Mako  schrieb  meist  Episteln  im  elegischen  Versmafi;  einen 
betrachtlichen  Teil  machen  seine  poetischen  Reflexionen  aus,  in  denen  er  — 
aufier  seinen  antiken  Vorbildern  —  den  Ruhm  der  grofien  Vorlaufer  der  Je- 
suitendichter  (Guilielmus  Becanus,  Sidronius  Hosschius,  Wallius,  des  nur 
andeutungsweise  erscheinenden  Thomas  Ceva  und  des  Ungarn  Schez,  der 
eigentlich  ein  Epiker  ist)  verewigt.^  In  der  Sammlung  befmden  sich  jedoch 
auch  Gedichte  iiber  sein  personliches  Schicksal  (z.B.  "Cum  ad  mathesim  Vien- 
nam  mitteretur"),  ja  sogar  einige  Tierfabeln,  My  then  und  Gebete. 

In  der  lateinischen  Jesuitendichtung— wie  auch  in  der  ungarischen  Lyrik 
des  18.  Jahrhunderts  — brachte  Ferenc  Fcdudi  eine  Wende.  Faludi  (1704-1779), 


laszl6  szorenyi 


155 


der  in  der  Mitte  des  Jahrhunderts  als  ungarischer  Beichtvater  der  Sankt  Pe- 
terskirche  jahrelang  in  Rom  lebte,  trat  als  Schriftsteller  mit  moralphilosophi- 
schen  Ubersetzungen  auf,  seine  ungarischen  und  lateinischen  Gedichte  blieben 
zu  seinen  Lebzeiten  ungedruckt.  Seine  lateinischen  Gedichte,  in  seinem  No- 
tizbuch  Omniarium  aufgezeichnet  und  zum  Teil  bis  heute  unveroffentlicht,  zeu- 
gen  davon,  dafi  Faludi  nicht  unverdient  in  die  romische  Arkadische  Akademie 
gewahlt  wurde.^  Er  verstand  das  Wesen  der  Arkadischen  Akademie,  verzich- 
tete  auf  das  barocke  Ideal  der  Gelegenheitsdichtung  der  vorangegangenen  Dich- 
tergeneration  und  machte  den  AUtag,  die  Regungen  des  eigenen  Lebens  zu 
den  Hauptthemen  seiner  Lyrik.  Die  interessantesten  seiner  Gedichte  sind  die- 
jenigen,  in  denen  er  seine  zum  gleichen  Dichterkreis  gehorenden  Freunde  wie 
den  weltbekannten  Naturwissenschaftler  Rogerius  Boscovich  charakterisiert. 
Auch  das  Gedicht,  in  dem  er  von  einer  vertraumten  Wzildlichtung  Abschied 
nimmt,  bahnt  den  Weg  zur  Innerlichkeit  des  horazischen  Dichtungsideals: 

Huius  Nympha  loci  sacrae  custodia  sylvae, 

Aeternum  salve,  perpetuumque  vale 
Vos  platani  rapidos  Phoebi  quae  frangitis  aestus, 

Tuque  susurranti  fons  (remoratus)  aqua; 
Aeternum  salvete  mihi  tuque  optima  rerum: 

Avia  frondosis  lympha  sub  arboribus. 
Hie  ego  dum  licuit  curas  solabar  acerbas 

Hie  .  .  .  et  (amictae)  .  .  .  gramine  ripae 
O  sopor,  o  blandae  volucres,  o  gramen  et  herbae 

Quam  fuit  hie  animo  vivere  dulce  meo. 
Este  mei  memores. 

Jedoch  machten  sich  in  erster  Linie  nicht  die  vor  aUem  epische  Ambitionen 
hegenden  Jesuiten  um  das  Aufbliihen  der  lateinischen  Dichtung  im  Ungarn 
des  18.  Jahrhunderts  verdient,  sondern  die  neuangesiedelten  Piaristen.  Die 
erste  Generation  der  Piaristen,  die  aus  Polen,  Schlesien,  Mahren  und  den  ver- 
schiedenen  Landern  Deutschlands  kam,  verkiindete  und  vertrat  zunachst  das 
Barockideal  des  17.  Jahrhunderts.  Fiir  ihre  Poetik  war  der  sog.  "stylus  Po- 
lonicus"  charakteristisch;  ihren  komprimiertesten  Ausdruck  fmdet  sie  in  der 
Poetik  von  Lukacs  Moesch  (1651-1701)  unter  dem  Titel  Vita  poeticc^  (1697), 
die  die  behandelten  Gattungen  und  Formen  jeweils  an  einem  Gedicht  gleich 
demonstriert.  Die  Piaristen  hatten  aber  keine  eigene  Ordenshochschule,  des- 
halb  gingen  sie  nach  Tyrnau  und  lernten  von  den  Jesuitenlehrern.  Der  Dich- 
tung der  zweiten  Generation  driickt  zdso  schon  die  Jesuitenpoetik  ihren  Stempel 
auf;  ein  bezeichnendes  Beispiel  dafiir  ist  das  Epyllion  Szegedis  {\Ti\)  von  Jakab 
Fiala  (1696-1733),  das  eine  interessante  Mischung  der  Ovidischen  Metamor- 
phoses und  der  von  den  Jesuiten  propagierten  Thematik  der  Landnaihme  und 
Friihgeschichte  ist.^  Der  produktivste  Dichter  dieser  Generation  ist  Konstan- 
tin  Halapy  (1693-1752).  Er  versuchte  sich  in  fast  alien  Gattungen,  war  je- 


156  NEULATEINISCHE  LYRISCHE  DICHTUNG   IN   UNGARN 

doch  in  erster  Linie  Epigrammatiker.  Er  lehnt  sich  an  Martialis  an,  natiirlich 
mit  Blick  auf  Owenus.  Er  geifielt  selbstverstandlich  nicht  nur  die  in  dem 
Repertoire  von  Martialis  erscheinenden  schlechten  Dichter,  betriigerischen 
Arzte,  liederlichen  Frauen,  sondern  entlarvt  —  mit  Blick  auf  die  ungarischen 
Geschehnisse  seiner  Epoche  —  aillgemein  die  Zwecklosigkeit  jeglicher  Auf- 
lehnung,  hierbei  wahrscheinlich  besonders  unter  dem  Einflufi  des  niederge- 
schlagenen  Freiheitskampfes  von  Rakoczi. 

In  cives  ob  rebellionem  vasallos. 
Saeva  repugnantes  gesserunt  praelia  cives, 

Libertas  quantum  contulit  ista  jugum! 
Qui  bello  vixere  prius  discorditer,  horum 

Concordes  animos  una  catena  facit.^^ 

Halapy  steht  auf  dem  halben  Wege  zwischen  der  barocken  Uppigkeit  des 
"stylus  Polonicus"  und  einem  die  Einfachheit  anstrebenden  Klassizismus,  des- 
sen  Stilideal  nunmehr  die  Klarheit  ist  (wie  er  selbst  formuliert:  "in  quo  nulla 
hiulcarum  Synaloepharum  concava  et  praerupta,  nulla  contortarum  Ellipsium 
aspera  tubera;  at  limpida  planaque  congeries  .  .  .").^^  Dieses  Streben  erscheint 
nicht  einmal  in  seinen  Epigrammen,  sondern  in  seinen  Fabeln  am  deutlich- 
sten,  die  er  im  Band  Apologorum  Moralium  libri  F/(1747)  sammelte.  Hier  lehnte 
er  sich  an  Avianus  und,  in  zweiter  Linie,  an  Phaedrus  an.  AUer  Wahrschein- 
lichkeit  nach  kannte  er  auch  La  Fontaine;  die  Piaristen  befafiten  sich  in  dieser 
Zeit  schon  mit  der  franzosischen  Literatur,  sie  fiihrten  deren  Lehre  in  einig- 
en  ihrer  Hauser  ein,  und  liefien  franzosische  Klassiker  ins  Lateinische  iiber- 
setzen.^^  Halapy  hatte  Sinn  auch  fur  Dichtungen,  die  von  seinen  eigenen 
dichterischen  Bestrebungen  grundsatzlich  abwichen.  Ein  Beweis  dafiir  ist,  dafi 
er  in  den  Anhang  des  vorhin  erwahnten  Bandes  auch  die  umfangreiche  Ele- 
gie  des  friih  verstorbenen  piaristischen  Dichterfreundes  Mark  Koricsanyi 
(1707-1752)  aufnahm.  Dieses  Gedicht,  das  Koricsanyi  —  auf  Halapys  Bitte 
hin  — im  Jahre  1747  schrieb,  ahmt  viele  Dichter,  von  Ovid  und  Properz  bis 
zu  den  Vertretern  der  zeitgenossischen  arkadischen  Dichtung  nach,  jedoch 
losen  sich  all  diese  Anspielungen  und  entlehnten  Motive  im  kraftvollen,  mit- 
unter  an  Zynismus  grenzenden,  philosophischen  Pessimismus  des  Dichters  auf. 
Fiir  ihn  bieten  weder  die  Dichtung  noch  das  Leben  einen  Sinn.  Das  goldene 
Zeitalter  ist  seiner  Meinung  nach  endgiiltig  vorbei,  seine  eigene  Epoche  ist 
bis  ins  Extreme  verdorben  und  steht  in  Widerspruch  zu  dem  wahren  Ziel  der 
Kultur.  Aufier  dieser  Elegie,  die  den  Hohepunkt  der  lateinischen  Lyrik  im 
Ungarn  des  18.  Jahrhunderts  darstellt,  wurde  von  ihm  nur  seine  selbstverfafite 
Grabinschrift  herausgegeben.  Seine  anderen  Manuskripte  sind  bis  heute  un- 
veroffentlicht.  Es  sei  dieses  Epitaph  zitiert: 

lUe  ego,  sub  modica  quem  cespes  condit  arena, 
Ingenii  vilis  fabula  facta  mei. 


LASZL6  SZORENYI  icy 

Sum  macer,  et  longus:  titulus  meus  iste  sit  unus, 

Hie  sit  honos,  haec  laus,  hoc  decus  omne  meum. 
Cur  macer,  inquiris?  nimirum  praebita  nunquam, 

Dum  vixi,  ingenio  sunt  alimenta  meo. 
Musa  mihi  favit,  nunquam  Fortuna  beavit; 

Sed  veluti  dubio  lusit  acerba  trocho. 
Nil  Patriae  praeter  vitam  ultra  debeo;  pro  qua 

Victima  cum  toto  sanguine  vita  cadat. 
At  tibi  sit  melior  requies  post  funera,  quisquis 

Manibus  optata  pace,  Viator  ais: 
Ecce  coronatis,  quem  stare  decebat  in  astris, 

Pauper  in  abiecta  valle  Poeta  iacet.^^ 

Die  entscheidende  Hinwendung  zur  Klassik  verbindet  sich  mit  dem  Namen 
von  Norbert  Conradi  (1718-1785).  Auch  sein  Lebenswerk  ist  nur  fragmen- 
tarisch  bekannt,  seine  Gedichte  barren  zum  Grofiteil  noch  der  Herausgabe.^* 
Von  grofier  Bedeutung  ist  seine  Janus-Pannonius-Edition  {Libri  III.  poematum, 
elegiarum  et  epigrammatum,  Budae  1754);  die  Riickkehr  zu  dem  grofiten  unga- 
rischen  Vorbild  zeigt  symptomatisch,  dafi  er  mit  der  Tradition  des  Barock 
endgiiltig  bricht  und  auf  Anregung  durch  die  antiken  Dichter  sowie  des  Vor- 
bildes  aus  der  Renaissancezeit  die  Gattung  des  langst  vergessenen  lyrischen 
Epigramms  wiedererweckt.  Der  Stolz  des  Dichters  und  die  Lobpreisung  der 
Macht  der  Dichtung  sind  somit  verstandlich: 

O  voces,  Divum  munus  mentisque  ministrae. 

Quels  loquimur  quidquid  spiritus  intus  alit. 
Voce  peregrinos  nobis  sociamus  amicos, 

Jungit  quos  caelum  dividit,  ilia  animos. 
Attrahit  et  dulci  copulat  praecordia  nexu, 

Fortior  est  patria,  sanguine,  conjugio. 
Sauromatas  Dacosque  truces,  Scythiosque  phalanges 

Barbariemque  omnem  flectere  voce  potes.'^ 

In  erster  Linie  wurden  Piaristen,  jedoch  aufier  ihnen  auch  Jesuiten  und  welt- 
liche  Geistliche  Mitglieder  der  beriihmten  romischen  Arkadischen  Akade- 
mie.  Der  namhafteste  von  ihnen  war  Janos  Krizosztom  Hannulik  (1745-1816), 
der  in  ganz  Europa  als  der  Horaz  des  18.  Jahrhunderts  bekannt  war.'^  Er 
wurde  in  mehrere  europaische  Gelehrtengesellschaften  gewahlt,  so  auch  in 
die  der  Stadt  Helmstedt.  Er  stand  in  regem  Briefwechsel  mit  Heyne  aus  Gottin- 
gen  und  Henke  aus  Helmstedt.  Da  ich  iiber  die  Tatigkeit  der  anderen  ar- 
kadischen Dichter  andernorts  schon  geschrieben  habe,  mochte  ich  hier  und 
jetzt  nur  einige  Ziige  seiner  Dichtung  hervorheben.^^  Er  wahlte  sich  vor 
allem  Horaz  zum  Vorbild;  so  sammelte  und  stellte  er  seine  Gedichte  ebenfalls 
in  vier  Biichern  Oden  und  einem  Buch  Epoden  zusammen.'^  Nach  Varga, 


158  '  NEULATEINISCHE  LYRISCHE  DICHTUNG  IN  UNGARN 

dem  Verfasser  einer  Monographic  iiber  ihn,  folgte  er  bei  seinen  Horaz-Imi- 
tationen  in  erster  Linie  Sarbiewski;  von  dem  polnischen  Dichter  iibernahm 
er  vor  allem  die  Neuerung,  anstatt  der  romischen  historischen  Gegenstande 
nationale  zu  behandeln.  So  konnte  Hannulik  der  grofite  Vorlaufer  der  friih- 
romantischen  Lyrik  in  ungarischer  Sprache  werden:  sein  den  Ruhm  der  Ver- 
gangenheit  heraufbeschworender,  die  Verweichlichung  der  eigenen  Epoche 
geiftelnder,  die  Wiedergeburt  des  nationalen  Charakters  fordernder  Ton  wird 
spater  beim  grofiten  Dichter  der  ungarischen  klassizisierenden  Praromantik, 
Daniel  Berzsenyi,  wieder  auftauchen.  Dem  konnen  wir  noch  hinzufugen,  dafi 
sogar  die  grofie  romantische  Ode,  die  als  zweite  Nationalhymne  der  Ungarn 
angesehen  wird,  Mihaly  Vorosmartys  1836  veria&ter  Mahnruf{Sz6zat),  betreffs 
seiner  Geschichtsbetrachtung  und  Ausdrucksweise  Hannuhk  viel  zu  verdanken 
hat,  der  in  der  Zeit  des  nationalen  Widerstandes  nach  dem  Tod  Kaiser  Josefs 
II.,  im  Jahre  1790,  sein  anonymes  Gedicht  Ode  ad  Libertatem  Hungaricam 
veroffentlicht  hatte.^^  Unter  dem  Einflufi  dieser  Geschichtsauffassung 
schwanden  natiirlich  die  epikureischen  Elemente  von  Horaz,  und  nur  das  stoi- 
sche  Menschenideal  blieb.  Dieser  Stoizismus  verdeckt  zuweilen  selbst  die  christ- 
liche  Einfarbung  und  macht  manches  Gedicht  von  ihm  zur  reinen  Offenbarung 
der  Todesfurcht,  zur  modernen  Neudichtung  der  Mimnermosschen  Elegie. 
Zum  Beispiel  schreibt  er  in  der  Ode  33  des  4.  Buches  {De  Ineluctabili  Mortis 
necessitate): 

Scilicet  intereunt 
Omnia,  perque  vices  oriuntur,  ut  admonet  annus. 

Nos  tamen  occidui 
Umbra  sumus,  nee  fas  dabitur  revocare  Caducas 

Corporis  exuvias.^^ 

Zur  Bereicherung  der  neulateinischen  Lyrik  trugen  auch  Ungarns  Prote- 
stanten  — wenn  auch  sporadischer  als  die  katholischen  Orden  — bei.  Von  ihnen 
ist  der  hochgestellte  Regierungsbeamte  in  Siebenbiirgen,  Graf  Janos  Lazar 
(1703-1772),  der  bekannteste.^^  Die  Literatur  beschaftigte  sich  bisher  ledig- 
lich  mit  seinem  umfangreichen  Gedicht  von  der  ungarischen  Sprache,  der  auf 
deutsche,  italienische  und  spanische  Vorbilder  zuriickgehenden  Florida,  ob- 
wohl  auch  seine  lateinische  Sammlung  Opera  poetica  (1765)  aufierst  interessant 
ist.  In  seinen  Jugendjahren  studierte  er  in  Deutschland,  war  ein  Schiiler  von 
Christian  Wolf  in  Marburg.  Der  Philosoph  schatzte  den  Eifer  des  jungen  Un- 
garn, der  bald  sein  Lieblingsschiiler  wurde.  Nachdem  Lazar  im  Jahre  1731 
heimgekehrt  war,  iibersetzte  er  auch  mehrere  Biicher  Wolfs  iiber  Philoso- 
phic und  Geometric  aus  dem  Deutschen  ins  Lateinische,  leider  blieben  sie  aber 
unveroffentHcht.  Noch  in  Marburg,  im  Jahre  1728,  huldigte  er  seinem  Mei- 
ster  anlafilich  dessen  Geburtstages  in  einem  langeren  Gedicht,  in  dem  er  die 
ganze  Enzyklopadie  der  Wissenschaften  auffiihrt,  um  Wolfs  universales  Wis- 
sen  zu  beweisen.^^  Auch  die  biblische  Dichtung,  eine  von  England  ausgehende 


laszl6  szorenyi  159 

Mode  in  der  Mitte  des  Jahrhunderts,  liefi  ihn  nicht  unberiihrt.  So  fafite  er 
den  Siindenfall  {Lapsus  reparatus,  1724)  sowie  das  erste  Kapitel  des  Buches 
Hiob  — letzteres  in  Hexametern  —  in  Verse.  Man  mufi  unvermeidlich  daran 
denken,  dafi  ihm  die  seit  dem  heiligen  Hieronymus  wahrende  Diskussion 
dariiber  bekannt  war,  ob  Hiobs  Buch  nach  antiken  Metren  gelesen  werden 
kann.^^  Da  er  sich  nicht  an  die  Vorschriften  zu  halten  hatte,  die  die  Dichter 
der  Orden  im  allgemeinen  banden,  konnte  er  sich  sowohl  iiber  seine  philo- 
sophischen  Zweifel  als  auch  iiber  die  Liebe  viel  offener  aufiern.  Zum  Beispiel 
zieht  er  den  Sinn  des  menschlichen  Lebens  in  seiner  Trauerode  anlafiUch  des 
Todes  seines  Freundes  Mihaly  Teleki  weit  offener  als  alle  Zeitgenossen  in  Zwei- 
fel und  malt  die  aller  Lebewesen  harrende  universale  Vernichtung  in  den  denk- 
bar  dunkelsten  Farben.^'^  Ein  andermal  verwendet  er  in  einem  zur  Hochzeit 
von  Antal  Mikes  verfafiten  Epithalamium  ails  Ausgangspunkt  ein  von  anderen 
in  dieser  Epoche  wohl  nicht  verwendetes,  antikes  Gedicht:  das  Pervigilium  Ve- 
neris P  Seine  Erinnerungen  an  Deutschland  kehren  auch  spater  zuriick:  er 
verewigt  z.B.  die  Schonheiten  eines  Kurbades  im  Seklerland,  Lovetes,  in  einer 
Epistel,  und  bei  der  Schilderung  der  Ortschaft  fallen  ihm  bald  der  Spring- 
brunnen  des  koniglichen  Schlosses  von  Hannover,  bald  die  Grotten  in  Kassel 
ein.^^  Manchmal  gibt  er  die  Quelle  mancher  antiken  Anspielungen  in  Fufi- 
noten  an.  Verwendet  er  ein  Zitat,  so  setzt  er  es  meistens  in  charakteristischer 
Weise  neu  ein.  In  einer  Ian  gen  Korrespondenz  mit  einem  Jesuiten  von  Ko- 
lozsvar  (dt.  Klausenburg),  Istvan  Biro,  mahnt  er  zum  Beispiel  seinen  Brief- 
partner,  dafi  die  Macht  der  Papste  iiber  die  Seelen  nicht  als  absolut  betrachtet 
werden  darf,  die  Gnade  liegt  allein  in  Gottes  Handen,  und  auch  der  Jesuit 
tate  besser  daran,  wenn  er  seine  Augen  direkt  auf  den  Himmel  heftete: 

Adtolle  quaeso  Tu  quoque  verticem 
Caelosque  spectans,  mitte  leves  humi 
Umbras,  et  ingentem  beatae 
Fumum,  et  opes  strepitumque  Romae: 

Omitte  laudes  Vatis,  in  arduum 

Quem  tollis  ultra  quam  meruit.  Tuus 
Est  ille  mirator,  simulque 
Ut  valeas  animo  precatur.^^ 

Das  eingefiigte  Zitat  stammt  aus  der  Ode  29  des  3.  Buches  der  Oden  von 
Horaz,  dort  bezieht  es  sich  freilich  darauf,  dafi  Maecenas  aufs  Land  kommen 
und  den  romischen  Pomp  verlassen  soil. 

Der  letzte  Dichter,  dessen  wir  gedenken  wollen,  ist  der  jung  verstorbene 
Studentendichter  des  Reformierten  Kollegiums  zu  Debrecen,  Pal  Nemeti 
(1758-1783).^^  Seine  hcindschriftlichen  Gedichte  gab  ein  Professor  in  De- 
brecen, Jozsef  Peczely  junior,  erst  im  Jahre  1830  heraus.^^  Nemeti  ahmte  — 
aufier  Ovid  und  Horaz  —  in  erster  Linie  Catull  und  Tibull  nach.  Auch  er  hatte 


l60  *  NEULATEINISCHE  LYRISCHE  DICHTUNG  IN  UNGARN 

ein  neulateinisches  Vorbild,  und  zwar  Petrus  Lotichius  aus  dem  16.  Jahrhun- 
dert.  Aufier  seinen  Gelegenheitsdichtungen  sind  die  verstreuten  Stiicke  eines 
Liebeszyklus  am  dauerhaftesten.  Zunachst  intoniert  er  die  reine  Erotik  und 
versucht  auf  eine  in  der  ungarischen  Dichtung  dieses  Jahrhunderts  ungewohnte 
Art  und  Weise  die  sich  weigernde  Jungfrau  davon  zu  uberzeugen,  dafi  die 
keuschen  Frauen  auch  Gott  nicht  lieb  sind: 

ToUe  jugum  Veneris:  castas  Deus  odit,  et  ultrix 
Cypria  pro  populo  stat  Venus  ipsa  suo.^^ 

Spater  hat  er  seine  erotische  Ausschweifung  bereut,  und  nun  betet  er  zu 
Jesus  in  der  Elegie  Amor  Mens  crucifixus  so: 

Altera  flamma  meos  jam  jam  depascitur  artus, 

Jam  tenet  affectus  altera  flamma  meos. 
Te  modo  complectar,  Te  clementissimxe  Jesu! 
Crimina  Tu  meritis  ablue  nostra  Tuis.  .  .  .  ^ 

Die  lateinische  Lyrik  Ungarns  im  18.  Jahrhundert  verdient  auch  an  sich 
schon  die  Erforschung  und  Erschliefiung  des  ungeheuer  reichen  Materials. 
Dariiber  hinaus  besteht  ihre  entwicklungsgeschichtliche  Bedeutung  darin,  dafi 
sie  die  Entstehung  der  modernen  Lyrik  in  ungarischer  Sprache  vorbereitet  hat. 


Anmerkungen 


1.  F.  Szabo:  "A  kolteszet  tanitasanak  elmelete  es  gyakorlata  a  jezsuitak  gyori 
tanarkepzojeben  (1743-1773)"  in:  Irodalomtorteneti  Kozlemenyek  1980,  469-85,  480-81. 

2.  L.  Szorenyi:  "De  carminibus  heroicis  Ovidium  Vergiliumque  imitantibus  a  pat- 
ribus  Societatis  Jesu  provinciae  Austriacae  saeculis  XVII-XVIII  scriptis,"  in:  Acta  con- 
ventus  Neo-Latini  Amstelodamensis ,  Ed.  by  P.  Tuynman,  G.  C.  Kuiper  and  E.  Kefiler. 
Miinchen,  1979,  964-75. 

3.  Carminum  Libri  tres  Conscripti  a  P.  Paulo  Mako  e  Soc.  lesu,  Tyrnaviae,  Typis 
Collegii  Academici  Soc.  Jesu,  Anno  1764. 

4.  op.  cit.  2.  Elegia  I.  Praefatio. 

5.  op.  cit.  19.  Elegia  VIII.  Ad  amicum. 

6.  M.  Szauder:  "Faludi  Ferenc  a  Romai  Arkadia  tagja,"  in:  Irodalomtorteneti 
Kozlemenyek  1982,  448-51. 

7.  E.  Nagy:  Faludi  Ferenc  Omnidriumdnak  latin  koltemenyei  e'sjegyzetei,  Ipolysag,  1943.  33. 

8.  cf.  I.  Ban:  Irodalomelmeleti  kezikonyvek  Magyarorszdgon  a  XVI-XVII,  szazadban 
Budapest,  1971. 

9.  cf.  I.  Teglasy:  "A  Hungarus-tudat  kifejezodese  Fiala  Jakab  'Szegedis'  cimii  epyl- 
lionjaban,"  in:  Mora  Ferenc  Muzeum  Evkonyve  Szeged  191^119,  Nr.  1,  195-204. 

10.  Patris  Constantini  a  Passione  Domini  e  clericis  regularibus  Scholarum  Piarum  Epi- 
grammatum  moralium,  aenigmatum  ac  tumulorum  libri  VII,  Tyrnaviae,  Typis  Academicis  So- 
cietatis JESU,  Anno  M  DCC  XLV.  Lib.  IL  CXXXVL  p.  123. 


laszl6  szorenyi  i6i 


1 1 .  I.  Jelenits:  "A  latin  nyelvii  epigramma  tizennyolcadik  szazadbeli  piaristak  koltoi 
gyakorlataban,"  in:  Irodalomtorteneti  Kozlemenyek  1969,  176-98,  182-83. 

12.  cf.  A.  Tarnai:  "Lateinische  Ubersetzungen  franzosischen  Schrifttums  im  Un- 
garn  des  18.  Jahrhunderts,"  in:  Acta  conventus  neo-Latini  Amstelodamensis,  976-82. 

13.  E.  Friedreich:  Haldpy  Konstantin  piarista  latin  Kolto  emlekezete  (1698-1752),  in: 
A  temesvdri  kegyesrendi  fogimndzium  ertesitoje,  1902/03.  1-55.,  loc.  cit.  54-55. 

14.  cf.  I.  Jelenits:  op.  cit,  und  ders. :  "Conradi  Norbert:  Sic  est,  conscripsi  versus.  .  . ," 
in:  Irodalomtorteneti  Kozlemenyek,  1969,  243-46. 

15.  I.  Jelenits:  op.  cit.  195. 

16.  cf.  Anm.  5. 

17.  L.  Szorenyi:  "L'Arcadia  latina  neH'Ungheria  del  diciottesimo  secolo,"  in:  Ve- 
nezia,  Italia,  Ungheriafra  Arcadia  e  illuminismo.  A  cura  die  Bela  Kopeczy  e  Peter  Sarkozy. 
Budapest,  1982,  293-304. 

18.  loannis  Chrysostomi  Hannulik  e  Scholis  Piis  Lyricorum  libri  II,  M.  Karolini,  .  .  . 
1780;  Lyricorum  liber  tertius,  et  quartus.  Ac  unus  epodon,  .  .  .  M.  Karolini  ...  1781. 

19.  Ode  ad  Libertatem  Hungaricam.  —  Libertatem  nemo  Bonus,  nisi  cum  anima  simul  amittit. 
CA  TO  apud  Sallustium .  —  s .  1 . ,  s .  a . 

20.  Hannulik:  lib.IV.  Ode  XXXIII.  pp.  86-288. 

21.  R.  Earth:  Grof  Ldzdr  Jdnos  elete  es  muvei,  Budapest  1914. 

22.  Joanniscom,  Lazar  .  .  .  Opera poetica  VariiArgumenti,  Claudiopoli,  1765.— Carmm 
Genetliacum  in  Natales  Celeberimi  [!]  Domini  Christiani  Volffi  Anno  1728,  pp.  12-20. 

23.  Tentamen  Poeticum  ex  J  obi  Cap.  1-mo,  Lazar:  op.  cit.  pp.  60-64. 

24.  op.  cit.  67-82.  Carmen  junebre  In  obitumlll.  S.R.I.  Comitis MICHAELIS  TELEKI 
deSzek,  A6.  1745. 

25.  op.  cit.  87-88.  Ad  Nuptias  Comitis  Antonii  MIKES  Anno  1751,  14.  Februarii. 

26.  op.  cit.  156-58.  Laus  Acidulae  Lbvetensis  in  Sede  S.   Udvarhely,  Anno  1754. 

27.  op.  cit.  126. 

28.  L.  Varga:  Nemeti  Pal,  a  debreceni  kollegium  latin  didkkdltoje,  Debrecen  1940. 

29.  Carmina  Pauli  Nemeti,  Edidit  Josephus  Peczely,  Debrecini,  .  .  .  1830. 

30.  op.  cit.  Nr.  XXXIX.  Eroticon,  pp.  104-5. 

31.  op.  cit.  Nr.  XLIX,  pp.  118-20. 


The  Dramaturgy  of  Buchanan's  Tragedies 

John  Wall 

George  Buchanan's  four  tragedies  were  a  fruit  of  his  teaching  duties  at 
the  College  de  Guyenne  in  Bordeaux  when  he  had  to  provide  plays 
for  his  students  to  act.^  His  translation  of  the  Medea  was  the  first 
to  be  published  together  with  Erasmus's  versions  of  the  Hecuba  and  Iphigeneia 
in  Aulide  in  Michel  Vascosan's  Paris  edition  of  1544.  Jephthes  sive  Votum  Tra- 
goedia  appeared  in  Morel's  edition  of  1554.  A  translation  oi  Alcestis  followed 
in  1556,  again  published  by  Vascosan.  Finally  Baptistes  sive  Calumnia  was  pub- 
lished by  Vautrollier  in  London  1577.  However,  the  order  of  composition  was 
different.  Buchanan  himself  asserted: 

Sed  quae  prima  omnium  fuerat  conscripta  (cui  nomen  est  Baptista)  ul- 
tima fuit  edita;  ac  deinde  Medea  Euripidis.^ 

(But  the  play  which  was  the  first  to  be  written  entitled  the  Baptistes  was 
the  last  to  be  printed;  then  came  the  Medea  by  Euripides.) 

Even  so  the  question  of  what  was  written  when  is  not  settled  definitively,  since 
the  author  wrote  to  Daniel  Rogers  on  9  November  1579: 

Quatuor  Tragoediae  meae  sunt  editae,  e  quibus  duae  sunt  e  Graeco  tr2ins- 
latae.  Medeam  non  in  hoc  scripseram,  ut  ederetur,  sed  cum  Graecis  li- 
teris  absque  magistro  darem  operam,  ut  verba  singula  inter  scribendum 
diligentius  expenderem:  amicis  importune  flagitantibus  edidi,  cum  Lat- 
inas  literas  Burdegalae  docerem,  ac  fabulam  singulis  annis  pueris  agen- 
dam  dare  cogerer.  In  ea  cum  multa  negligentius  elapsa  essent,  post  aliquot 
annos  retractavi  eam,  et  quaedam  in  ea  vulnera  ita  sanavi,  ut  adhuc  ci- 
catrices alicubi  appareant.  Tres  reliquas  majore  cum  labore  ibidem  ef- 


fud 


(Four  tragedies  of  mine  were  published  of  which  two  are  translations  from 
Greek.  I  had  not  written  the  Medea  to  be  published  but  so  that,  when 


164  *  THE   DRAMATURGY  OF  BUCHANAn's  TRAGEDIES 

I  was  working  on  Greek  without  any  teacher,  I  might  attend  very  care- 
fully to  individual  words  while  writing.  At  the  urgent  prompting  of  friends 
I  published  it  when  I  was  teaching  Latin  at  Bordeaux  and  had  to  pro- 
duce a  piece  to  be  performed  every  year  by  the  pupils.  Since  many  slips 
had  crept  in  rather  carelessly,  after  a  few  years  I  withdrew  it  and  so  healed 
some  of  the  wounds  in  it,  although  even  now  the  scars  show  at  some 
points.  The  three  other  tragedies  I  put  out  with  greater  effort  on  the  spot.) 

The  1544  edition  moreover  states  that  the  play  was  acted  at  Bordeaux  in  1543. 
Very  likely  the  acted  version  was  a  reworking  of  an  earlier  exercise,  done  at 
the  same  time  as  the  Baptistes  during  Buchanan's  first  sojourn  at  the  college 
between  1539  and  1543-1544.  The  Jephthes  and  the  translation  of  the  Alcestis 
seem  to  have  been  finalised  during  a  second  sojourn  in  Bordeaux  between  1545 
and  1547.* 

Dr  Sharratt  has  pointed  out  Buchanan's  use  of  Euripides,  Seneca,  Lucretius 
amd  Terence,^  but  more  needs  to  be  said  of  his  dramaturgy  since  the  vision 
of  tragic  heroism  especially  in  the  Jephthes  is  more  than  the  sum  of  the  models 
that  lay  before  him.  For  instance,  the  ending  of  the  Baptistes  is  arresting.  Clearly 
the  death  of  John  the  Baptist  is  not  tragic.  Although  splendid  with  divine  ve- 
hemence and  a  handsome  face  (ille  caelestis  vigor  /  decusque  vultus  morte  tri- 
sti  emarcuit  [1325-26]),  his  grim  death  deserves  no  tears,  according  to  the 
messenger  who  rebukes  the  chorus.  Wretched  people  can  bewail  only  the 
wretched  dead  (mortuos  miseri  fleant  /  miserosque  tantum  [1335-36]);  the  Bap- 
tist's death  is  due  solely  to  Fortuna  who  kills  the  guilty  and  the  innocent  alike 
without  being  able  to  make  them  wretched;  John  has  lived  a  good  life,  and 
so  cannot  have  a  bad  death;  he  has  died  to  support  the  truth  of  religion  and 
the  laws  of  their  forefathers.  Buchanan  carefully  removes  any  possibility  that 
the  Baptist  may  be  seen  as  a  tragic  figure.  There  is  not  even  awe  provoked 
by  the  sight  of  him  changing  from  prosperity  to  misery.  The  author  seems  to 
have  observed  that  in  Greek  tragedies  death  need  not  entail  wretchedness  and 
he  converts  that  fact  to  the  Christian  viewpoint.  Dramatically,  John's  death 
is  at  best  martyrdom,  at  worst  a  crime  — but  it  is  no  tragedy. 

The  chorus  accept  the  rebuke  and  own  that  they  are  mistaken.  At  first  sight 
their  final  words  look  like  conventional  Senecan  lament  for  their  own  suffer- 
ings in  a  world  that  can  so  wickedly  kill  a  prophet.  Yet  it  is  more  than  this: 
all  the  sufferings  are  precisely  the  outcome  of  political  corruption  and  inse- 
curity. Even  before  John  himself  spoke,  Malchus  had  accused  him  of  stirring 
up  disorder: 

plebs  audiat,  plebs  pareat,  sit  sobria, 
iniecta  frena  non  recuset  (139-40). 

(the  people  should  listen,  obey,  be  prudent, 
not  refuse  the  curbs  imposed  on  them.) 


JOHN  WALL  165 

Moreover,  the  queen's  hatred  was  engendered  not  because  of  the  prophet's  morad 
outrage  at  her  adultery  but  because  he  spurned  her  dignity,  viUfied  the  au- 
thority of  the  royal  title,  and  subjected  the  sceptre  to  the  lewd  mob  (902  ff.). 
The  last  choral  ode  (1264-1315)  is  especially  bitter.  The  realm  that  ought  to 
have  been  exemplary  in  devotion  has  become  a  "vitae  specimen  scelestae"  (1269) 
where  double  suffering  is  inevitable  —  in  affliction  now,  and  with  devastation 
to  come  through  hunger,  war,  privation,  and  poverty  (1313).  However  the 
chorus  are  not  distinct  from  the  "Davidis  regnum  Solymaeque  turres."  They 
are  an  integral  part  of  it,  and  are  themselves  2ilso  convicted  by  their  own  words. 
So  now  in  this  light  —  or  rather  darkness  —  the  closing  speech  of  the  play  makes 
clear  that  we  have  watched  a  tragedy  that  has  befallen  not  an  individual  but 
an  individual  collective  —  the  nation  itself. 

Buchanan's  most  audacious  stroke  is  to  embody  the  mediate  source  of  evil 
in  King  Herod  —  that  is  not  so  remarkable  —  but  at  the  same  time  to  make  us 
sorry  for  him  — and  that  is  deft.  While  accepting  from  the  gospel  account  the 
character  of  an  indulgent,  vicious  king  who  is  nevertheless  in  some  awe  of  the 
wild  desert  preacher,  Buchanan  does  not  present  his  vacillation  as  due  to  in- 
herent weakness.  If  anything  Herod  seems  more  aware  than  anyone  else  of 
the  duties  and  dangers  of  kingship.  Both  the  queen  and  John  make  conflicting 
demands  but  their  importunings  converge  dramatically  in  both  being  essen- 
tially partial  and  destructive  of  common  happiness.  Buchanan  does  not  make 
the  mistake  of  presenting  Herod  as  a  bad  man  with  intermittent  lapses  into 
moral  goodness.  Always  thoroughly  self-interested,  he  is  yet  caught  in  a  di- 
lemma which  is  precipitated  by  the  rash  oath  to  Salome.  That  oath  acts  as  a 
dramatic  emblem.  The  play's  omission  of  the  famous  dance  is  not  so  much 
because  of  prudery,  but  so  as  to  concentrate  draimatic  weight  on  Herod's  im- 
possible choice.  The  scene  even  presents  the  queen  speaking  the  truth  iron- 
icafly  and  unhelpfully.  For  the  simple  proposition  that  the  king's  role  is  to 
command  what  is  just  ("Aequa  imperare  regium  est"  [1204])  is  no  longer  ad- 
equate, and  the  queen  sneers  that  he  does  not  seem  to  know  yet  (that  is,  in 
this  case)  what  a  king's  functions  are  ("nondum  mihi  /  regum  videre  nosse  quae 
sint  munera"  [1219-20]).  His  sourest  moment  is  when  he  resdises  that  in  pledg- 
ing his  word  to  a  girl  he  has  entrusted  to  her  his  safety,  kingdom,  wealth,  and 
life  itself  (1246-49).  The  chorus's  following  reflections  underline  his  baleful 
doom.  Not  only  is  David's  kingdom  to  suffer,  but  Herod  is  the  focus  of  its  down- 
fall: he  causes  the  ruin  and  will  himself  be  afflicted.  Buchanan  compounds  the 
effect  by  allowing  that  Herod  will  continue  for  a  time  in  apparent  prosperity. 
But  the  lack  of  restraint  in  Herod's  bloody  pride  and  cruelty  will  be  more  than 
matched  by  God's  restraint  in  waiting  to  call  him  to  full  account.  Thus,  sur- 
prisingly, it  is  Herod  who  bears  some  of  the  characteristics  of  a  tragic  hero. 

The  spectator  must  admire  the  way  in  which  Buchanan  has  taken  the  demonic 
energy  of  Medea  (in  the  play  he  was  translating  at  the  same  time)  and  ap- 
portioned it  to  both  the  Baptist  and  Herod.  The  result  of  this  dramatic  ploy 


l66  '  THE  DRAMATURGY  OF  BUCHANAN's  TRAGEDIES 

is  to  make  credible  the  major  political  theme.  For  adapting  the  usually  suave 
genre  of  the  dedicatory  letter,  Buchanan  bluntly  commends  the  play  to  the 
young  James  VI: 

illud  autem  peculiarius  ad  te  videri  potest  spectare,  quod  tyrannorum 
cruciatus  et,  cum  florere  maxime  videntur,  miserias  dilucide  exponat. 
Quod  te  nunc  intelligere  non  conducibile  modo  sed  etiam  necessarium 
existimo,  ut  mature  odisse  incipias  quod  tibi  semper  est  fugiendum  (97). 

(This  play  can  seem  especially  apt  for  you  since  it  plainly  expounds  the 
torments  of  tyrants  and,  when  they  seem  most  prosperous,  their  wretch- 
edness. I  think  it  not  only  useful  but  necessary  for  you  to  know  this  so 
that  you  may  opportunely  begin  to  hate  what  you  must  always  shun.) 

Here  stands  the  truth  that  the  play  mercilessly  exposes.  There  is  no  need,  as 
has  mostly  happened  in  past  surveys,  to  seek  exact  political  paradigms  for  the 
characters  in  Scotland,  England,  or  France.  Nor,  even  in  an  age  of  religious 
conflict,  is  there  necessity  to  take  confessional  sides.  Buchanan  has  rather  been 
stimulated  by  many  contemporary  events  and  people  to  display  the  conflict 
that  ultimately  is  rooted  deep  in  men's  hearts  and  which  constitutes  the  ab- 
original Christian  tragedy.  As  an  aside,  I  would  add  that  the  anonymous 
seventeenth-century  translation  of  the  Baptistes  would  be  on  these  grounds  at 
least  aptly  attributable  to  the  author  o{  Paradise  Lost,  since  the  unexpected  sym- 
pathy for  Satan  and  that  for  Herod  are  curiously  akin. 

It  was  Buchanan  who  drew  attention  to  the  connection  between  his  tragedy 
Jephthes  and  the  contemporary  dispute  about  vows  carried  on  by  Bucer  and 
Latomus: 

De  votis  scripto  in  tragaedia  de  voto  Jephte  meam  sententiam  ostendi 
cuius  disputationis  haec  summa  est:  vota  quae  licite  hunt  omnia  servanda 
ac  multi  etiam  sciunt  Conimbricae  me  orationem  Barpt.  Latomi  super 
hac  re  contra  Bucerum  et  legere  libenter  solitum,  et  semper  laudare.^ 

(On  the  question  of  vows:  I  expressed  my  mind  in  the  tragedy  about  Jeph- 
tha's  vow.  A  summary  of  the  discussion  is  this:  vows  which  are  made 
licitly  must  all  be  kept.  And  there  are  many  people  in  Coimbra  who  know 
that  I  was  accustomed  freely  to  read  the  treatise  of  Latomus  against  Bucer 
on  this  matter  and  always  to  praise  it.) 

As  McFarlane  and  Sharratt  point  out,  he  probably  wanted  an  example  of  or- 
thodoxy to  sway  his  inquisitors  favourably.  Nevertheless  I  do  not  agree  when 
McFarlane  dismisses  the  continued  use  of  the  impious  vow  in  th^  Jephthes  (after 
the  Baptistes)  as  only  marginally  important.^  The  same  dramatic  importance 
of  the  vow  shown  in  the  earlier  play  is  present  also  in  th^  Jephthes.  For  the  death 
of  Iphis  is  no  more  due  by  the  rightful  demands  of  a  vow  than  was  the  Baptist's 
death  to  Herod's  vow.  Symmachus  dismisses  Jephtha's  anguish  as  a  scruple 


JOHN  WALL  l6y 

(732);  the  priest  opposes  the  evil  fulfilment  of  the  vow  on  the  grounds  that  the 
vow  should  never  have  been  made  in  the  first  place  (905);  Jephtha  admits  that 
he  has  no  excuse  to  defend  his  crime  (929-31);  Storge  the  mother  rages  that 

Scelesta  vota  grata  non  sunt  numini  (1163), 

(wicked  vows  are  not  pleasing  to  God) 

especially  when  they  violate  a  mother's  joint  rights.  In  addition,  Iphis  pleads 
her  innocence  (1215  ff.).  Just  as  the  dramatic  purpose  of  the  vow  in  the  Bap- 
tistes  was  to  emphasize  Herod's  bitter  free-choice,  so  now  even  more  clearly 
the  play  emphasizes  that  Jephtha  compels  himself  readily  and  voluntarily  (1 160). 
His  protest  that  he  wishes  the  vow  were  at  his  discretion  is  feeble  and  short- 
lived. Almost  at  once  he  acknowledges  the  impious  deed  as  his  own: 

....  hoc  meum 
nefas,  meum  istud  est  scelus  totum,  meae 
immerita  poenas  pendis  imprudentiae  (1229-31), 

(this  sin  is  mine,  the  crime  is  totally  mine:  undeservedly  you 
[Iphis]  suffer  the  punishment  for  my  rashness.) 

As  he  recognises  the  contradiction  of  the  "nefanda  sacra"  vowed  against  God's 
will  (1240-41)  he  offers  his  own  life  in  substitution  for  his  daughter's. 

This  is  the  point  where  Buchanan  shows  considerably  more  invention  than 
in  the  Baptistes.  In  that  play  Herod  makes  his  decision  for  mundane  survivaJ 
when  threatened  by  the  obsessively  vengeful  queen  and  by  the  zealot.  He  will 
indeed  suffer  but  as  yet  has  no  inkling  of  disaster.  Although  the  diagnosis  of 
a  profoundly  sin-flawed  world  and  the  royal  protagonist's  plight  are  interest- 
ing, there  is  more  assertion  than  dramatic  demonstration.  This  is  not  so  in 
the  Jephthes.  He  may  have  had  a  crudely  mistaken,  fundamentalist  view  of  a 
vow's  obligation.  He  also  certainly  wishes  to  prevent  future  evil  and  to  atone 
for  the  past.  Nevertheless  Buchanan  does  not  allow  easy  escape  into  piety,  and 
in  doing  so  makes  a  bid  for  real  Christian  tragedy  when  Iphis  forestalls  her 
father  — she  makes  a  free  offering  of  her  life. 

All  along,  the  direct  discussion  of  the  vow  has  seemed  a  technicad  quibble. 
Its  dramatic  purpose,  however,  is  to  enable  Iphis  to  be  a  redemptive  figure 
without  being  another  Iphigeneia  (a  play  that  Buchanan  did  not  translate  but 
certainly  knew  since  it  was  published  in  Erasmus's  translation  with  the  Scot's 
translation  of  the  Medea).  Iphis  readily  consents  to  suffer  and  gladly  offers  her 
life  (1267-69),  so  that  her  blood  on  the  altar  is  expiatory  (1295).  Christ's  re- 
pugnance to  suffering  in  Gethsemane  and  the  conformation  of  his  will  to  the 
Father's  so  that  the  whole  people  might  be  free  is  parallelled  now  in  the  girl 
(1317-18).  Like  Saints  Katherine,  Juliana,  and  Margaret  in  the  old  legenda  sanc- 
torum, she  is  twice  described  as  "animi  virilis"  (1332,  1410),  £ind  the  Messenger 
reports  her  last  words  as  a  hymn  in  which  she  begs  forgiveness  for  her  people 


l68  *  THE  DRAMATURGY  OF  BUCHANAN's  TRAGEDIES 

by  her  atoning  death  (1413  ff.).  The  serenity  of  her  healing  death  begins  at 
once.  Only  Storge  is  unreconciled;  and  she  extends  the  lament  begun  earlier 
by  Jephtha.  It  epitomises  the  pain  that  human  nature  inevitably  suffers  in  a 
world  that  resists  the  grace  so  obviously  triumphant  in  Iphis: 

solamen  ipso  luctuosius  malo 

quod  leniendo  exasperat  malum  vetus  (1445-46). 

(This  consolation  is  more  doleful  than  the  evil  itself;  with 
its  soft  touch  it  irritates  the  old  ill.) 

The  way  in  which  Iphis's  fmal  words  model  themselves  on  a  hymn,  such 
as  the  Aeterne  rerum  conditor,  draws  attention  to  Buchanan's  substantial  use  of 
liturgical  writings,  and  above  all  of  the  Psalms.  So  often  these  scriptural  poems 
speak  of  the  afflicted  good  man,  desolate  in  a  world  where  evil  seems  to  pre- 
vail, where  success  turns  to  ashes  for  all  except  evil  men.  The  primitive  com- 
plaint occasionally  dares  to  arraign  God  because  the  suppliant  is  utterly  bereft 
of  any  other  resource.  While  at  times  the  petitioner  recognises  his  own  fault 
he  has  also  to  take  account  of  the  fact  that  suffering  is  the  commonest  and  least 
penetrable  of  human  experiences.  Since  there  is  no  escape,  only  the  naked  re- 
alisation can  survive  that  in  God  alone  can  there  be  redemption.  As  prayed 
by  the  Church,  the  mystery  of  human  suffering  is  not  dissolved  but  is  sub- 
sumed in  the  free  suffering  of  Christ.  Throughout  the  Jephthes  the  Psalms  re- 
sonate in  such  terms,  beginning  with  the  first  two  choral  odes,  Jephtha's  first 
speech,  and  the  Priest's  argument.  The  Psalms,  rather  than  the  Book  of  Job, 
the  Miserere  (ps.  50  Vg.),  govern  the  expression  of  Jephtha's  anguish.  It  is  ap- 
posite to  recall  that  when  the  Jephthes  was  published  without  the  other  plays, 
every  edition  except  one  printed  it  together  with  Buchanan's  Psalm  Para- 
phrases. Indeed  the  reader  of  the  paraphrases  is  likely  best  to  appreciate  the 
tragedy. 

As  may  be  expected  there  is  a  major  component  ofimitatio,  not  least  because 
a  practical  purpose  of  the  play  was  its  school-use  as  a  pedagogical  tool.  How- 
ever, the  result  is  not  to  paganise  a  sacred  subject.  Rather,  Buchanan  exploits 
the  raw  harshness  of  the  biblical  story  and  expands  it  into  a  notable  depiction 
of  both  suffering  and  grace.  Nor  is  the  play's  sad  world  merely  a  representa- 
tion of  Senecan  pessimism.  The  limitations  of  man  embodied  in  Jephtha  are 
not  those  of  a  hero  in  Classical  drama,  but  translate  the  desperation  of  the 
Psalms.  The  mistaken  vow  is  not  a  simple  butt  for  preacher  or  reformer  to 
excoriate.  To  focus  our  understanding  we  might  recall  Shakespeare's  view  of 
the  same  man  in  Henry  IV Pari  3  when  the  forsworn  Clarence  excuses  his  treach- 
erous return  to  dubious  loyalty  by  claiming. 

To  keep  that  oath  were  more  impiety 

Than  Jephtha's  when  he  sacrificed  his  daughter  (5.1.  90- 

91). 


JOHN  WALL  169 

Both  playwrights  saw  the  moral  ambiguities  leading  to  conflict  that  are  im- 
plicit in  the  scriptural  account.  By  reducing  the  dramatic  presence  of  Iphis's 
death,  which  is  scarcely  if  at  all  reported,  Buchanan  has  shaped  his  material 
to  portray  in  a  non-Christian  a  Christian  tragic  hero.  In  both  the  Baptistes  and 
the  Jephthes  we  have  neither  solely  didactic  imitation  nor  biblical  exegesis,  nor 
polemic.  In  the  unexpected  heroes  Herod  and  Jephtha,  the  plays  — above  all 
the  Jephthes  — take  us  to  the  suffering  heart  of  a  form  of  Christian  tragedy.  I 
am  sure  that  a  good  acting-version  of  the  plays  could  be  prepared  and  suc- 
cessfully presented  today. 

The  University  of  Tasmania 


Notes 


1.  George  Buchanan,  Tragedies,  ed.  P.  Sharratt  and  P.  G.  Walsh  (Edinburgh:  Scot- 
tish Academic  Press,  1983).  Latin  quotations  from  the  plays  are  all  from  this  edition, 
although  I  have  not  always  reproduced  their  translation. 

2.  George  Buchanan,  Vita  in  Ian  D.  McFarlane,  Buchanan  (London:  Duckworth, 
1981),  Appendix  G,  542. 

3.  George  Buchanan,  Opera  Omnia,  ed.  T.  Ruddiman,  rev.  P.  Burmann  (Leiden: 
Langerak,  1725)  2:755. 

4.  McFarlane,  Buchanan,  94;  see  also  119  and  378  for  a  fuller  but  more  scattered 
treatment  of  the  question. 

5.  P.  Sharratt,  "Euripides  latinus:  Buchanan's  Use  of  his  Sources,"  in  Acts  of  the  Fourth 
Neo-Latin  Congress:  Bologna  (in  press). 

6.  G.  J.  C.  Henriques,  George  Buchanan  in  the  Lisbon  Inquisition  (Lisbon:  auth.,  1906)  25. 

7.  McFarlane,  Buchanan,  382. 


Vergil  in  Wien: 

Bartholinis  Austriados  Libri  XII 

und  Jakob  Spiegels  Kommentar 

Gerhild  Scholz  Williams 


No  one  can  number  the  small  signs  which  may  revive  this  distant  figure.  .  .  . 
(William  Gass,  1985) 

Die  Figur,  in  unserem  Falle  Maximilian  I.,  der  Kaiser,  der  Letzte 
Ritter,  setzt  sich  zusammen  aus  vielen  Zeichen.  In  Literatur-, 
Kunst-  und  Geschichtswerken  lebt  sie,  fur  immer  dem  interpretie- 
renden  Eifer  der  Nachwelt  iiberantwortet,  einmal  der  letzte  Ritter  und  erste 
Kaiser,  andere  Male  umgekehrt,  je  nach  den  ideologischen  Windrichtungen 
des  Betrachters.  Episch  riickwartsgewandt  tragt  er  dem  Vergilschen  Aeneas 
und  den  mittelalterlichen  Helden  seine  Schuld  ab,  und  vorwartsgewandt 
verbiirgt  er  die  Grofie  Osterreichs,  die  universale  Friedensherrschaft. 

So  jedenfalls  entnehmen  wir  es  Bartholinis  Mammutwerk,  den  zwolf 
Biichern  der  Austrias  —  z\^6\{  Biicher,  mit  Jakob  Spiegels  Kommentar  iiber 
300  Seiten,  da  selbst  der  zeitgenossische  Leser  die  epische  Allegorie  nicht  immer 
ohne  Hilfe  entschliisseln  konnte;  "Intertext"  ("sunt  his  intertexta  ex  physicis, 
astronomicisque  petita  loca.  .  .  .'^  nennt  Vadian  Spiegels  Beitrag  zu  Bartho- 
linis Werk,  "prodesse  et  delectare  volens."  Es  geht  um  den  Bayrischen  Erb- 
folgekrieg  (1504),  in  dem  sich  Pfalzgraf  Rupert  und  Maximilian  I.  feindlich 
gegeniiberstanden,  da  Maximilian  das  Erbe  Georgs  des  Reichen  von  Bayern- 
Landshut  nicht  — wie  erwartet  — an  Ruperts  Frau  Elisabeth,  sondern,  als  an 
die  Krone  zuriickfallendes  Schwertlehen,  an  dessen  Neffen  Albert  und  Wolf- 
gang von  Bayern-Miinchen  weitervergab. 

Niichterne  Belehrung  tritt  neben  kunstvolles  und  wortreiches  Herrscherlob, 
Schlachtenbeschreibung  und  Zukunftsvisionen  begleiten  Gotteriiktionen  und 
Menschenkampfe.  "Eruditio"  und  "maiestas,"  so  Gianfrancesco  Pico  della  Mi- 
randola  an  Bartholini,  verbinden  sich  zum  Erinnerungs-  und  Ruhmeswerk. 
Unsere  Aufmerksamkeit  gilt  besonders  dem  Ersten  Buch  d^rAustrias,  Text  und 
Intertext,  dessen  Rolle  in  der  Gesamtstruktur  des  Werkes  einerseits  und  Bar- 
tholinis kreativer  Auseinandersetzung  mit  dem  vergilischen  Vorbild  anderer- 
seits.^ 


172  VERGIL  IN  WIEN 

Das  erste  Buch,  dessen  grofiter  Teil  dem  Abstieg  Roberts  in  die  Unterwelt 
gewidmet  ist,  dient  zur  Einfiihrung,  die  Hauptthemen  werden  vorgestellt,  das 
Ende  angedeutet,  die  Gegner  beschrieben.  Die  Auseinandersetzung  entfaltet 
sich  in  drei  ineinandergreifenden  und  sich  gegenseitig  bedingenden  Spharen: 
in  der  kosmischen,  in  der  politischen  und  in  der  personlichen,  oder,  um  es 
mit  William  Gass  zu  variieren,  Bartholini  stellt  Maximilian  als  "public  figure, 
inner  man"  und  in  seinem  Milieu  dar.^  In  der  kosmischen  Dimension  stehen 
sich  zwei  Gottinnen  feindlich  gegeniiber,  Pallas  und  Diana.  Pallas  protek- 
tioniert  Rupert,  der  im  Epos  Robert  heifit,  und  Diana,  die  Schutzgottin  der 
Jager,  steht  Maximilian  zur  Seite.  Am  Ende  tragt  Diana  den  Sieg  davon,  je- 
doch  nicht,  ohne  dafi  iiber  lange  Seiten  hin  in  Dialogen,  Monologen  und 
Kommentaren  die  Griinde  erlautert  werden,  warum  es  so  und  nicht  anders 
sein  kann.  Der  Grofie  des  Hauses  Osterreich,  sprich  dem  Willen  des  hochsten 
Gottes,  kann  niemand  im  Wege  stehen.  Pallas  erkennt  schliefilich,  was  der  Leser 
nach  griindlichem  Spiegelkommentar  zu  den  Stichworten  providentia  (156)  und 
Frieden  und  Recht  (51)  schon  lange  weifi,  dafi  das  Schicksal  seinem  Lauf  folgt, 
wenn  es  erst  einmal  in  Gang  gesetzt  ist. 

Der  Kampf  zwischen  Robert  und  dem  Kaiser,  Rupert  und  Maximilian,  der 
Fiirstenopposition  und  dem  Kaiser,  das  eigenwillige  Verstofien  des  jungen 
Pfalzgrafen  gegen  das  Konigsrecht,  bilden  die  politische  Dimension  des  Werkes, 
sein  Milieu.  Das  Erste  Buch  und  sein  ambivalentes  Ende  lassen  keinen  Zwei- 
fel  aufkommen  an  Bartholinis  realpolitischem  Anliegen,  an  seiner  klaren  Par- 
teinahme  fur  den  Kaiser. 

Letztendlich,  schwerer  zu  identifizieren,  finden  wir  die  Privatsphare,  die 
Menschen,  die  sich  gegeniiberstehen,  die  ihre  RoUe  im  G6tter(Gottes-)plan 
spielen,  deren  Leben  aber  auch  weniger  metaphysische  Sorgen  bringt,  Angst, 
zum  Beispiel,  Zweifel  und  schlaflose  Nachte,  Neid,  Jahzorn  und  Kleinmut 
vor  der  Schlacht,  wie  etwa  im  Buch  VI,  wo  Pallas  den  niedergeschlagenen  Ro- 
bert findet  und  ihm  gut  zureden  mufi,  damit  er  in  die  Schlacht  zuriickkehrt. 
Auf  der  Gegenseite  zeigt  die  offentliche  Geste  des  Erbarmens  Maximilian  als 
den  grofimiitigen  Kaiser,  aber  auch  als  den  tugendhaften  Menschen.  Wie- 
derholt  erscheint  er  friedenswillig  und  beruhigend,  "placido  Caesar  germanice 
vultu"  (II,  61),  eine  Beschreibung,  die  auch  im  Weisskunig  dio^  Erhabenheit  und 
innere  Ausgeglichenheit,  die  olympische,  die  gottliche  Ruhe  ausdriicken  und 
alien  sichtbar  machen  soil. 

Demgegeniiber  zeigt  sich  Roberts  Wut,  Aufgebrachtheit  und  Unbeherrscht- 
heit  doppelt  grenzenlos,  negativ  und  zerstorerisch.  Robert  vergeht  sich  gegen 
die  kaiserliche  Gewalt,  sein  Rebellengeist  wird  angestachelt  von  der  Kriegs- 
lust  der  Gottin  Bellona.  Stolz  auf  ihre  Vernichtungsarbeit  in  Troja,  Theben 
und  anderen  Kriegsschauplatzen,  iiberlegt  die  Gottin,  auf  einer  ihrer  Luft- 
reisen  iiber  dem  nordlichen  Europa  verweilend,  ob  es  nicht  an  der  Zeit  sei, 
die  Deutschen  ihre  Macht  spiiren  zu  lassen.  Gesagt,  getan.  Ein  alter  Handel 
ist  schnell  bei  der  Hand.  Schon  stiirzt  sich  die  Kriegsgottin,  gefolgt  von  den 


GERHILD  SCHOLZ  WILLIAMS  I73 

Erinnyen,  auf  die  Stadte  der  Pfalz.  Die  Eumeniden  schutteln  ihr  Schlangen- 
haar,  der  Kampf  gegen  den  Kaiser  beginnt.  Robert,  von  Wut  entbrannt  iiber 
den  vermeintlich  ungerechten  Verlust  seines  Erbes,  stellt  sich  aus  Ubermut, 
verletztem  Stolz,  aus  Machtgier  und  Kampfeslust  gegen  Recht  und  Gerech- 
tigkeit,  gegen  legitime  kaiserliche  Herrschaft.  Das  Gegeneinander  von  Maxi- 
milians Ruhe  und  Besonnenheit  und  Roberts  heifikopfiger  Wildheit  tragt  dem 
Geschichtsbild  des  jungen  Antagonisten  der  Krone  Rechnung.  Zeitgenossen 
sind  sich  dariiber  einig,  dafi  Unbesonnenheit  und  falsch  exerzierter  Wage- 
mut  viel  zu  der  Niederlage  des  jungen  Fiirsten  beigetragen  hatten.*  Wieder- 
holten  Bemiihungen  Maximilians,  den  Streit,  zwar  in  seinem  Sinne,  jedoch 
giitlich  auszutragen,  stellte  sich  Rupert  entschieden  entgegen:  Gegen  den 
Wunsch  Maximilians,  das  Erbe  unter  den  Neffen  und  der  Tochter  zu  teilen, 
und  damit  Machtballungen  zu  verhindern,  beruft  sich  Rupert  auf  das  natiir- 
liche  Erbrecht,  was  Elisabeth  das  Ganze  zuspricht.  Um  1504  ist  Maximilian 
stark  genug,  dieser  Auseinandersetzung  im  Vertrauen  auf  viele  Verbiindete  — 
ein  neutrales  weil  auf  Mailand  wartendes  Frankreich,  ein  relativ  friedliches 
Venedig— ruhigen  Gemiites  entgegenzusehen.  Bartholinis  Charakterzeich- 
nungs-  und  Stimmungsbarometer  beider  Manner  tragt  diesem  Tatbestand 
voU  Rechnung. 

Der  ausbrechende  Konflikt  fiihrt  Rupert  ins  Exil,  verbannt  im  eigenen  Land 
von  dem,  was  er  fiir  das  Seine  halt,  denn  Maximilian  hatte  die  Briider  Al- 
brecht  und  Wolfgang  von  Bayern-Miinchen  schon  am  30.  Januar  1504  mit 
dem  zuriickgenommenen  Erbe  belehnt.^  Der  Weg  zuriick  aus  dem  Exil  wird 
fiir  Rupert  mit  dem  Tod  enden,  das  Erste  Buch  bringt,  klassisch  verschliis- 
selt,  diese  Information.  Jahzornig  reifit  Rupert  weitere  Reichsfiirsten  in  die 
Auseinandersetzung.  Dem  Wahnsinn  des  drohenden  Biirgerkrieges  steht  die 
Warnung  entgegen,  die  wiederum  den  Ausgang  vorausahnen  lafit: 

Quo  ruitis  miseri.  Quae  tanta  exordia  Martis. 
Quodue  paratis  opus.  Quae  uos  socialibus  armis 
Impellit  rabies.  Satius  si  bella,  furorque 
In  Turcas  translata  forent  .  .  .(8) 

(Wohin,  ihr  Wahnsinningen,  ihr  Ungliicklichen?  Warum  ein  so  ge- 
waltiger  Anfang  des  Krieges?  Was  bereitet  ihr  vor?  Welcher  Wahnsinn 
treibt  euch  in  den  Biirgerkrieg?  Es  ware  besser,  wenn  ihr  die  Furien 
des  Krieges  gegen  die  Tiirken  entfesseltet.) 

Aus  der  Wut,  der  WOdheit,  der  Raserei  ("rabies")  ergibt  sich  ein  zweiter, 
schwerer  Fehler:  Der  ausbrechende  Biirgerkrieg  halt  den  Kaiser  von  wich- 
tigeren  Aufgaben  fern,  von  dem  Kampf  gegen  die  Unglaubigen,  gegen  die 
Tiirken,  verhindert  den  gottgewollten  Kreuzzug.  Furien  haben  die  Tiirken 
zum  Krieg  gegen  die  Christen  angestachelt,  Maiximilians  Kriegsplane  gegen 
sie  werden  zum  kosmischen  Kampf  gegen  die  Machte  der  Dunkelheit,  der  Un- 


174 


VERGIL  IN  WIEN 


terwelt.  Aus  ApoUos  Mund  horen  wir  seine  Berufung.  Maximilian  hatte  fiir 
1504  einen  Romzug  ge plant,  und  gehofft,  danach  weiterzuziehen  nach  Kon- 
stantinopel  und  ins  Heilige  Land.  Historiker  sind  sich  dariiber  einig,  dafi  die 
militarischen  und  damit  die  finanziellen  Anstrengungen  fur  den  Pfalzerkrieg 
die  Reichsressourcen  derart  erschopft  hatten,  dafi  eine  sofortige  Wiederauf- 
nahme  dieser  Plane  nach  Kriegsende  unmoglich  war.  Als  der  Kaiser  einige 
Jahre  spater  ahnliche  Vorsatze  in  die  Tat  umsetzen  woUte,  hatte  sich  die  po- 
litische  Lage  in  Europa,  besonders  die  Stellung  Frankreichs  so  entscheidend 
verandert,  dafi  an  einen  Kreuzzug  nicht  mehr  zu  denken  war.  Es  ist  offen- 
sichtlich,  dafi  Bartholini  eingehend  die  politischen  Hintergriinde  diskutiert  und 
kommentiert,  die  dem  Werk  trotz  seiner  sorgfaltigen  Umsetzung  in  den  My- 
thos  den  Handlungsverlauf  aufzwingen.  Eine  "alberne  Gottermaschine"  hatte 
es  Joachimsen  deshalb  einmal  genannt.^  Auch  Friedrich  Schubert,  der  als 
einer  der  ersten  Literaturwissenschaftler  sich  mit  dem  Werk  beschaftigte,  hat 
nicht  zuviel  Gutes  iiber  das  Epos  zu  sagen,  "schwiilstig-glanzend,"  "unstet 
und  verworren"  kritisiert  er  Bartholinis  tour  de  force  durch  die  imperiale  Po- 
litik.^  Im  Vergleich  mit  den  grofien  Vorgangem  Homer  und  Vergil  wirft  er 
Bartholini  Schwachlichkeit  und  Parteilichkeit  vor,  geschichtliche  Ungenauig- 
keit,  literarische  Ubersteigerung,  Schwerfalligkeit  und  Bombast. 

Dasselbe  Werk  lafit  den  Kommentator  Spiegel  zu  ganz  anderem  Urteil 
kommen:  Er  und  seine  Zeitgenossen  glauben  nicht  mehr  an  das  Pantheon,  son- 
dern  die  politischen  und  dynastischen  Wirren  des  friihen  16.  Jahrhunderts 
werden  im  respektierlichen  Gewand  der  alten  Epen  dargeboten,  die  Wiirde 
des  Stoffes  verlangt  ein  wiirdiges  Medium.  Anstelle  von  Priam,  Anchises,  Aen- 
eas und  Achilles  treten  die  Antagonisten  Robert  und  Maximilian  und  deren 
Parteiganger;  nur  ein  klassisches  Motiv  fehlt,  und  dies  ist  ein  Grund,  warum 
das  Gewicht  allzustark  auf  dem  Thema  der  dynastischen  Geschichte  des  Hau- 
ses  Habsburg  ruht,  wir  vermissen  alle  und  jede  romantische  Verwicklung.  Die 
Helden  dieses  Epos  haben  fiir  Frauen  keine  Zeit,  die  einzigen,  die  wirklich 
ins  Gewicht  fallen,  sind  die  Gottinnen,  und  selbst  Venus  zeigt  sich  unerwar- 
tet  zuriickhaltend.  Da  Liebeshandel  und  leidenschaftliche  Verwirrungen  feh- 
len,  miissen  andere  Konflikte  iiber  300  Seiten  (Spiegelkommentar  mitgezahlt) 
unser  Interesse  wachhalten.  In  der  Auseinandersetzung  des  Kaisers  mit  den 
Fiirsten  stehen  sich  Kreativitat  und  Zerstorungslust  gegeniiber,  Wachstum 
und  Verfall,  Ordnung  und  Chaos.  Auf  der  einen  Seite,  wir  wissen  auf  welcher, 
finden  wir  jeweils  Maximilian  und  seine  Partei,  auf  der  anderen  Robert. 
Schwarz-weifi  sind  nicht  die  Farben  Bayerns,  und  Bayern  verliert  hier  ja  auch. 
In  des  Kaisers  Richtspruch,  in  seiner  Warnung  ("Duces  .  .  .  impellit  rabies") 
spricht  die  Sprache  der  Ordnung  gegen  das  Chaos;  jedoch  Robert  in  seiner 
Unruhe,  "bella  movens  animo,"  hort  nicht,  ja,  stiirzt  sich  in  die  Schlacht  mit 
einer  Siegesgewifiheit,  von  der  es  sich  spater  herausstellt,  dafi  sie  einer  Fehl- 
interpretation  des  Orakels  folgt, 


GERHILD  SCHOLZ  WILLIAMS  I75 

ne  dubita,  dabitur  requies,  finisque  malorum. 
Nam  te  victurum  promittunt  numina,  Regem. 

(Zweifle  nicht,  Frieden,  Ruhe  werden  kommen,  das  Ende  der  Leiden. 
Dir  ist  versprochen  ein  Sieg  eines  Konigs)  (34). 

Was  soviel  heifit,  wie  "halte  dich  nicht  zuriick,  dir  ist  ein  Sieg  zugestanden 
von  einem  Konig."  Konig  Pyrrhus  erhalt  dieselbe  Antwort  von  dem  Orakel 
in  Delphi,  bevor  er  gegen  die  Romer  zieht:  "Aio  te  Romanos  vincere  posse" 
(Ennius,  Annates).  Robert  handelt  wie  Pyrrhus  im  Wahn  des  kommenden 
Sieges.  Der  junge  Pfalzgraf,  der  sich  nicht  dem  gerechten  Schiedsspruch  des 
Kaisers  beugen  will,  folgt  in  seiner  Verblendung  der  gottlichen  Prophetic  auf 
dem  falschen  Weg.  Sein  Schicksal  mufi  sich  erfiillen,  nachdem  er  diese  Wahl 
getroffen  hat.  Er  interpretiert  in  seinem  Sinne,  genarrt  von  seinem  verletzten 
Ehrgefiihl,  seiner  Kampfeslust.  Darin  liegt  Bartholinis  Verurteilung  des 
nichtchristlichen  Glaubens  an  die  im  Voraus  erkennbare  Zukunft:  Wer  in  die 
Geheimnisse  der  Zukunft  einzudringen  sucht,  sich  an  dem  Numinosen  ver- 
geht,  der  wird  auf  den  falschen  Weg  geleitet,  ver-fiihrt. 

Maximilian  fragt  nie,  er  erfahrt  zwar  Einiges  iiber  seine  Rolle  im  Plan  des 
hochsten  Gottes,  aber  immer  nur,  weil  er  unfehlbar  seine  Pflicht  tut  und  alle 
seine  Tugenden  im  Dienst  Osterreichs,  d.h.  im  Dienst  Gottes  aktiviert.  Er 
erhalt  seine  Botschaften  von  dem  hochsten  Gott  Zeus  selbst,  die  Boten  sind 
Merkur  oder,  oft  indirekt,  Apollo.  Maximilian  beschwort  keine  Toten,  die 
Ewiglebenden  sind  auf  seiner  Seite,  auf  der  Seite  Osterreichs.  Die  Gotter  liigen 
nie,  aber  der  Mensch  kann  und  wird  sie  mifiverstehen,  wenn  er  versucht,  ihre 
Geheimnisse  zu  ergriinden.^  Spiegel  kommt  mehrere  Male  auf  diesen  Punkt 
zuriick,  stellt  die  nichtchristliche  und  die  christliche  Haltung  zur  Zukunft  ein- 
ander  gegeniiber.  Der  Christ  glaubt,  seine  Gewifiheit  liegt  in  diesem  Faktum 
allein.  Robert  mifiversteht  nicht  nur,  was  ihm  von  dem  Seher  vermittelt  wird, 
er  bleibt  auch  blind  gegeniiber  dem,  was  ihn  personlich  betrifft,  er  weifi  nichts 
von  seinem  kommenden  Tod  und,  was  noch  schlimmer,  da  zukunftsraubend, 
ist,  nichts  iiber  den  Tod  seiner  Frau  und  seines  Sohnes.  Die  Machte  der  Un- 
terwelt,  die  er  angerufen  hatte,  schicken  in  Buch  zehn  die  todbringende  Krank- 
heit,  die  Pest,  der  Robert  und  seine  Familie  zum  Opfer  fallen,  ein  ruhmloser 
Tod  in  der  Tat. 

Als  Besucher  in  der  Unterwelt  wandelt  Robert  auf  Aeneas'  Spuren,  oder  so 
konnte  man  meinen,  bis  man  merkt,  dafi  diese  Reise  eine  grundsatzlich  an- 
dere  ist:  Aeneas,  der  Erwahlte,  erfahrt  dort  sein  Schicksal.  Er  hort  aus  dem 
Mund  seines  Vaters  Anchises  die  Verkiindigung  der  trojanischen  Ruhmes- 
herrschaft  im  neuen  Land,  in  Rom.  Auf  seiner  Wanderung  durch  das  Toten- 
reich,  unterrichtet  ihn  Anchises  iiber  dessen  Bewohner.  Er  sieht  den 
Steuermann  Palinurus  und  hat  eine  letzte  Begegnung  mit  der  liebesverzwei- 
felten  Dido.  Am  Ende  kehrt  er,  bestarkt  in  seinem  Sendungsbewufetsein,  zu 


176  VERGIL  IN  WIEN 

seinen  Leuten  zuriick,  Genau  in  der  Mitte  des  Epos,  in  Buch  sechs,  signal- 
isiert  Aeneas'  Reise  in  die  andere  Welt  die  epische  Wende,  den  Zug  in  die  Ge- 
schichte.  Der  Abstieg  ist  die  Suche  nach  Wahrheit  und  Tugend;  am  Ende  wird 
Tugend  mit  Wissen  belohnt.  Aeneas'  enger  Blickwinkel  eines  Vertriebenen, 
eines  ruhelosen  Wanderers  auf  einem  ruhelosen  Meer,  weitet  sich,  er  sieht  das 
grofie  Muster,  sein  Heroenschicksal  und  sein  Geschichtsverstandnis  verbinden 
sich  in  der  Apotheose  des  romischen  Herrscherhauses,  in  Kaiser  Augustus. 
AUes  das  ist  nun  ganz  anders  fur  Robert:  Nicht  Maximilian,  der  im  Vor- 
aus  bestimmte  Sieger,  der  strahlende  Stern  in  der  Krone  Osterreichs,  son- 
dern  Robert,  dem  die  Zerstorung  bevorsteht,  sucht  bei  den  Vorherigen  Rat 
(1,10,11).  Er  geht  mutig — folgt  er  doch  dem  Rat  seines  Vaters  —  und  beschiitzt 
von  dem  Schild,  dar,  Achilles'  Gottergabe  ahnlich,  die  Geschichte  der  glor- 
reichen  Taten  der  Pfalzer  zur  Schau  tragt.  Er  geht,  um  den  Ausgang  des 
Krieges  zu  erfahren.  Stolz  und  seiner  Sache  gewifi  prasentiert  er  sich  seinem 
Schwiegervater,  der  ihm  am  Eingang  begegnet  und  ihn  durch  das  Totenreich 
geleitet.  Auf  Roberts  Frage,  wie  denn  die  Toten  dazu  bewegt  werden  konnten, 
sich  zu  zeigen,  antwortet  Georg, 

solum  nos  improba  Vatis  .  .  . 
Vis  trahit  ad  Superos,  invitaque  cernimus  astra.  (26) 

(Nur  die  ungeheuere  Kraft  des  Sehers  zieht  uns  nach  oben,  die  unwil- 
ligen  Sterne  ansehend). 

Die  Oberwelt,  die  Welt  der  Lebenden,  reagiert  mit  Horror  auf  dieses  Schau- 
spiel,  die  Welt  verkehrt  ihren  Lauf: 

Nam  potis  est,  Phoebumque  retro,  coelique  meatus 
Vertere,  et  ex  atris  convellere  nubibus  ignes.  (26) 

Fiir  diejenigen,  die  glauben,  dafi  hier  Wahrheit  zu  finden  sei,  kommt  die  scharfe 
Warnung: 

Furor  est  secreta  movere 
Fatorum,  Vates:  sed  finge  arcana  Thyoneus 
Et  populus  mersura  tibi  monstraverit  arma 
.  .  .  o  miseri  tristes  praenosse  labores 
.  .  .  Fata  immota  mament  .  .  . 

(Es  ist  Wahnsinn,  wenn  der  Seher  die  Geheimnisse  des  Schicksals  auf- 
spiiren  will  .  .  .  Was  hilft  es,  Ihr  Ungliicklichen,  im  Voraus  die  trau- 
rigen  Miihen  zu  kennen,  Ungliick  zu  kennen,  bevor  es  kommt?  Das 
Schicksal  ist  unveranderlich  und  nimmt  seinen  Lauf.) 

Nur  diejenigen,  die  tugendhaft  und  unberiihrt  von  Machthunger  bleiben, 
werden  die  Sterne  des  Paradieses  sehen,  "nostri  Elysium,"  und  dazu  gehort 
nun  sicher  nicht  Robert.  Die  Schatten,  die  Robert  auf  Weisung  seines  Schwie- 
gervaters  betrachtet,  sind  solche,  die  seine  Siinden  teilen,  machthungrige 


GERHILD  SCHOLZ  WILLIAMS  177 

Romer,  blutriinstige  Kampfer  in  unheiligen  Biirgerkriegen,  alle  haben  nicht 
um  der  Gerechtigkeit  willen  Blut  vergossen,  sondern  aus  Zerstorungslust  und 
Machthunger.  Die  Stimme  des  Sehers  zwingt  nur  diese  ans  Licht.  Deutsch- 
land,  so  das  Orakel,  wird  es  anders  bestimmt  sein,  gerechte  Kriege  bewahren 
es  vor  der  Zerstorung: 

.  .  .  Saepe  fuit  pugna,  et  quantum  Germanice  cladum 

Perpessus  fueris,  quoties  nee  abiveris  aequo 

Marte  tui  servant  bellum  memorabile  Fasti.  .  .  .  (30) 

Die  Unterwelt  offnet  sich  Robert  auf  die  Intervention  des  Sehers,  der  kraft 
seiner  Gesange— "carminibus  Magicis"  — die  Schatten  hervorruft.  Die  so  Ge- 
rufenen  verkiinden  die  Verwiistung  des  Landes,  farben  das  Wasser  des  Rheins 
rot  mit  dem  Blut  der  Gefallenen. 

Die  Gotter  folgen  dem  Krieg  zwischen  Robert  und  dem  Kaiser  mit  Auf- 
merksamkeit  und  Engagement,  Paillas  auf  Seiten  Roberts  und  der  Pfalzer, 
Diana  zusammen  mit  Zeus  hinter  Maximilian.  Pallas'  Zorn  gegen  die  Oster- 
reicher  hat  mythische  Griinde:  Verargert  iiber  eine  falsch  verstandene  Ag- 
gression der  Osterreicher  gegen  ihren  Tempel,  attackiert  sie  die  Unschuldigen 
und  deren  kiinftige  Gotter,  obwohl  sie  sehr  wohl  weifi,  dafi  eines  Tages  dem 
Hause  Osterreich  ein  Prinz  geboren  wird,  der  die  Siegesfahnen  iiber  den  Bos- 
porus und  tief  hinein  nach  Afrika  tragen  wird.  Maximilian  als  Kreuzfahrer, 
Messias,  christlicher  Alexander,  neuer  Herkules,  all  das  kennen  wir  aus  den 
panegyrischen  Schriften,  aber  auch  aus  den  zeitgenossischen  Chroniken.  Die 
popularste  unter  ihnen,  die  Schedelsche  Weltchronik,  endet  in  einem  grofiar- 
tigen  Crescendo  imperialen  Sieges  iiber  die  Feinde,  die  das  Reich  von  innen 
und  von  aufien  bedrohen  (Blatt  CCLVII).^ 

Pallas  weifi,  was  kommt,  und  doch  stellt  sie  sich  dem  Schicksal  entgegen, 
wie  kann  ihr  Schiitzling  Robert  weiser  sein?  In  der  Mitte  des  Epos,  im  Sechs- 
ten  Buch,  wendet  Robert  sich  entmutigt  von  der  Schlacht  ab,  Pallas  mufi  ihn 
an  seine  Aufgabe  erinnern.  Sie  tragt  ihn  durch  die  Liifte  zuriick  zu  seinem 
Heer,  und  Bartholini  nimmt  die  Gelegenheit  wahr,  die  Schlachtenordnung  auf- 
zufiihren.  Die  beiden  feindlichen  Heere  stehen  sich,  zum  Kampf  bereit,  ge- 
geniiber,  Robert  auf  dem  Weg  zu  seinem  Tode,  Maximilian  vor  seiner 
Verherrlichung.  Die  momentane  Verzogerung  im  Ereignisverlauf,  wie  er  im 
Ersten  Buch  aufgezeigt  worden  war,  ist  voriiber,  der  Weg  zur  Losung  frei. 
Dem  Leser  von  Bartholinis  Werk  gibt  die  simultane  Erfassung  von  Vergan- 
genheit,  Gegen  wart  und  Zukunft  die  Gewifiheit,  dafi  der  Verlauf  der  Geschichte 
nicht  irrationale  und  willkiirliche  Abfolge  von  Ereignissen  ist,  sondern  Fort- 
schritt,  geplante,  stufenweise  Enthiillung  gottlichen  Wollens,  wo  die  Taten 
der  Helden  und  Antihelden  gleichermafien  ihren  Sinn  finden.  Die  narrative 
Gegenwart  steht  in  einem  signifikanten  Verhaltnis  zu  der  wirklichen  Gegen- 
wart,  Robert  zum  Kaiser,  wie  Rupert  zu  Maximilian.*^ 

Spiegels  Kommentar  begleitet  Bartholinis  Text,  manchmail  profus,  manch- 


178  VERGIL  IN  WIEN 

mal  nur  in  kurzen  Stichworten  den  Text  erlauternd,  selten  direkt  Stellung  neh- 
mend  zu  dem,  was  in  dem  Epos  vor  sich  geht.  Spiegel  ist  geiibt  in  diesem 
Metier,  hat  er  doch  schon  Scholien,  Kommentare  dieser  Art,  zu  Reuchlins 
Henno,  zu  Gianfrancesco  Picos  Staurostichon,  zu  Gunther  von  Pairis  Ligurinus 
geliefert.  Fiir  seine  treue  und  gelehrte  Arbeit  als  Maximilians  Privatsekretar 
und  allgemein  im  Dienste  der  Habsburger,  wurde  er  1529  zum  Pfalzgrafen 
erhoben.^^  Spiegels  Stil  ist  listenartig  niichtern  und  trocken,  seine  Prosa  steht 
im  gewollten  Gegensatz  zu  der  flamboyanten  Poesie  seiner  Vorlagen,  deren 
Hohenfliige  er  immer  wieder  auf  den  Boden  der  gelehrten  Instruktion  und 
Klarung  herunterholt.  Sein  theologisches  und  politisches,  sein  geschichtliches 
und  literarisches  Wissen  ist  immens,  aber  besonders  zeichnet  er  sich  durch  seine 
Gelehrtheit  auf  dem  Gebiet  der  Rechtsgeschichte  aus.  Hier  bringt  er  seine 
Hauptleistung,  er  veroffentlicht  im  Jahre  1539  das  Lexicon  Juris.  Fest  auf  der 
Seite  des  Kaiserhauses  engagiert,  versaumt  er  es  nie,  auf  die  ruhmreiche  Ge- 
schichte  d^T  Domus  Austriaeh.\nzu>NQ\s^n.  Seine  Kommentare  sind  Lehrbiicher, 
Kompendien,  in  denen  Fragen  der  Geographic,  der  Mythengeschichte,  der 
Literatur  eingehend  diskutiert  werden,  wo  er  aber  auch  die  gelaufigen  Lehr- 
meinungen  zur  Magie,  zur  Rolle  der  Fortuna,  zur  Stellung  des  Christen  im 
Universum,  iiber  den  guten,  christlichen,  und  den  schlechten,  nicht  christ- 
lichen  Tod  referiert.  Nie  verfangt  sich  Spiegel  in  die  syncretistischen  Gedan- 
kengange,  die  Giovanni  Pico,  dessen  Neffen  Gianfrancesco  Pico  Spiegel  zu 
seinen  Freunden  zahlte,  und  dessen  Staurostichon  er  kommentierte,  nahe  an 
den  Kirchenbann  brachten.  Sein  Hauptinteresse  gilt,  wie  aus  seinem  Lebens- 
werk  hervorgeht,  dem  Gesetz,  dem  Recht,  und  an  seinem  Herrscherbild  ist 
dies  der  Zug,  den  er  wiederholt  und  mit  Eifer  betont:  Maximilian  ist  der  ge- 
rechte  Herrscher,  er  wahrt  das  Gesetz.  Mit  Friedrich  Barbarossa  teilt  er  ein 
leidenschaftliches  Interesse  an  Rechtsreform  und  Reichsreform.  "Du  wirst  Recht 
geben,  denen,  die  die  Toga  tragen,  und  du  wirst  Jupiters  Bogen  wieder  er- 
richten,"  so  preist  Bartholini  den  Kaiser,  und  Spiegels  Kommentar  amplifiziert 
dieses  Urteil  (11,51). 

Solches  Lob  ist  keinesfalls  zu  hoch  gegriffen,  die  Osterreicher,  so  Spiegel 
eine  bekannte  Abstammungstheorie  zitierend,  sind  Nachkommen  der  Troja- 
ner,  wirklichen  Adel  gibt  es  nur  in  Deutschland,  was  andere  davon  zeigen, 
haben  sie  den  Deutschen  abgeschaut  (328).  Dies  sind  Spiegels  geschichtliche 
Tatsachen,  was  das  Epos  in  allegorischer  Verschliisselung  darbietet,  ist  nichts 
anderes,  als  deren  kiinstlerisch  kunstfertige  Aufarbeitung.  Natiirlich  weifi  der 
Leser,  so  Spiegel,  dafi  die  Gotter  und  Gottinnen  nie  gelebt  haben,  und  wenn, 
dann  nur  als  Helden,  die  zu  Gottern  erhoben  wurden.  Die  Alten  brauchten, 
wie  wir  auch,  Personifikationen  und  allegorische  Einkleidungen,  um  sich  die 
Wahrheit  leichter  zuganglich  zu  machen.  Das  nichtchristliche  Pantheon  ver- 
liert  alle  Verbindlichkeit  aufier  der,  dafi  es  im  Dienste  der  Dynastengeschichte 
als  exemplum  den  Weg  weist,  auf  dem  Maximilian  von  geahnter  Grofie  zu  mani- 
fester  Gotteserwahltheit  fortschreitet,  und  der  Robert,  seinen  jungen,  heifiblii- 


GERHILD   SCHOLZ  WILLIAMS  I79 

tigen  doch  letztendlich  wiirdigen  Gegenspieler,  von  arrogantem  Grofienwahn 
zur  Vergebung  fiihrt.  Denn  vergeben  wird  ihm  am  Ende,  er  bekommt  einen 
Platz  unter  den  Gottern,  seine  Strafe  allerdings  ist  vom  dynastisch- 
geschichtlichen  Standpunkt  aus  betrachtet,  schwer:  Ihm  bleibt  der  Heldentod 
im  Kampf  versagt,  Geschichte  verweigert  sich  dem  Mythos.  Die  "alberne 
Gottermaschinerie"  kommt  mit  unfehlbarer  Prazision  zum  prophezeiten  Ziel, 
zu  dem  Sieg  Maximilians  iiber  alle  seine  Feinde,  zu  dem  Triumph,  in  dem 
die  Konfluenz  von  Welt-  und  Heilsgeschichte  sichtbar  wird.  In  uncharakter- 
istischer  Begeisterung  wendet  sich  Spiegel  am  Ende  des  Werkes  in  einer  De- 
dikation  an  Georg  von  Osterreich  ,  den  Bischof  von  Brixen:  Sein  Ziel  und 
Wunsch  war  es,  die  "incomparabilis  sacrosancta  imago"  des  Kaisers  zu  ehren, 
dem  "vero  divo,  vere  felici,  vere  Augusto,  vere  patrepatriae"  eine  Gedehtnus  zu 
widmen.  Die  Austrias  gehort  in  Maximilians  Ruhmeswerk,  sie  ist  als  solches 
ein  Kommentar  zum  Verhaltnis  von  Humanisten  und  Hof,  Gelehrten  und 
Kaiser,  Literatur  und  Politik.^^  Die  kosmische,  politische  und  personliche 
Auseinandersetzung  im  Namen  des  Ruhmes  Osterreichs  ist  Lehrstiick  und 
Kunststiick,  dessen  maiestas  und  eruditio  dem  politischen  und  literarischen  Ehr- 
geiz  des  Kaisers  voll  entgegenkommen. 

"No  one  can  number  the  small  signs  which  may  revive  the  distant  figure," 
mit  der  Suche  nach  Maximilian,  der  fernen  Figur  in  Bartholinis  Text,  hatten 
wir  begonnen.  Am  Ende  stellen  wir  fest,  dafi  die  feme  Figur,  die  unser  Epos 
zum  Leben  erweckt,  weniger  Maximilian,  als  Robert/Rupert  ist.  Ihm  gehort 
das  Interesse  zumindest  des  modernen  Lesers,  sein  Schicksal,  so  wie  es  Bar- 
tholini  darstellt,  entbehrt  nicht  des  Dramas  und  der  Tragik.  Seine  Geschichte 
gibt  dem  Epos  die  erzahlerische  Spannung,  Maximilians  Geschichte  gibt  ihm 
die  Apotheose  und  Spiegels  Kommentar  die  gelehrte  utilitas. 


Anmerkungen 


1 .  Guntheri  Poetae  clarissimi  Ligurinus,  seu  Opus  De  Rebus  gestis  Imp.  Caesaris  Friderici, 
I.  Aug.  Lib.  X  absolutum.  Richardi  Bartholini  Perusini,  Austriados  Lib.  XII  Maximiliano  Au- 
gusto dicati.  Cum  scholiis  lacobi  Spiegelij.  Selest.  VCMDXXXI  Die  grundlegende  Verof- 
fentlichung  zu  Bartholini:  Stephan  Fiissel,  Riccardus  Bartholinus  Perusinus.  Humanistische 
Panegyrik  am  Hofe  Kaiser  Maximilians  /. ,  Baden-Baden,  1985. 

2.  Lucans  Pharsalia,  geplant  auf  12  Biicher,  ist  Bartholini  auch  bekannt  gewesen, 
insbesondere  scheint  er  ihm  in  den  geographischen,  ethnographischen,  naturwissen- 
schaftlichen  und  besonders  in  den  historischen  Exkursen  verpflichtet  zu  sein.  Es  fehlt 
jedoch  in  Lucan  der  ganze  Gotterapparat,  und  die  Zuspitzung  auf  die  Antipoden  Cae- 
sar und  Cato,  Freiheit  und  Tyrannei,  die  Tatsache,  daft  letztendlich  Tyrannei  (iber 
Recht  siegt,  daft  es  keine  Theodizee  gibt,  weist  darauf  hin,  daft  Bartholini  sich  Vergil 
wesentlich  starker  verpflichtet  sieht,  als  Lucan.  Siehe:  "Lucan"  in  DerKleine  Pauly,  Stutt- 
gart, 1969,  745-48. 


l8o  VERGIL  IN  WIEN 


3.  William  Gass,  "The  Death  of  the  Author,"  in:  Habitations  of  the  Word,  New  York, 
1985,  271. 

4.  Hermann  Wiesflecker,  Kaiser  Maximilian  I;  das  Reich,  Osterreich  und  Europa  an  der 
Wende  zur  Neuzeit,  4  Bande,  Munchen,  1971-1981,  Bd.  3,  164-205. 

5.  A.  Bartlett  Giamatti,  Exile  and  Change  in  Renaissance  Literature,  New  Haven,  1984, 
5-20. 

6.  P.  Joachimsen,  Geschichtsauffassung  und  Geschichtsschreibung  in  Deutschland  unter  dem 
Einfluji  des  Humanismus,  Leipzig,  1910,  Repr.  Aalen,  1954. 

7.  F.  H.  Schubert,  "Riccardo  Bartholini.  Eine  Untersuchung  zu  seinen  Werken  iiber 
den  Landshuter  Erbfolgekrieg  und  den  Augsburger  Reichstag  von  1518,"  in:  Zeitschrift 
fiir  bayerische  Landesgeschichte  19,  1956,  95-127. 

8.  W.  Shumaker,  "Astrology,"  in:  The  Occult  Sciences  in  the  Renaissance.  A  Study  in  In- 
tellectual Patterns,  Berkeley,  1972,  1-56. 

9.  Die Schedelsche  Weltchronik  (1493),  Bibliophile  Taschenbiicher,  64,  Dortmund,  1979. 

10.  A.  Fichter,  Poets  Historical.  Dynastic  Epic  in  the  Renaissance,  New  Haven,  1982,  5,  14. 

1 1 .  Bibliographische  Angaben  zu  Spiegel  in  G.  Scholz  Williams  and  Steven  Rowan, 
"Jacob  Spiegel  on  Gianfrancesco  Pico  and  Reuchlin:  Poetry,  Scholarship  and  Politics 
in  Germany  in  1512",  in:  Bibliotheque  dHumanisme  et  Renaissance  44,  1982,  292. 

12.  J. -D.  Miiller,  Gedehtnus  —  Literatur  und Hofgesellschaft  um  Maximilian  I.,  Munchen, 
1982. 


Beobachtungen  zum  Verhaltnis  von  Humanismus 

und  Naturwissenschaft 

im  deutschsprachigen  Raum* 

Dieter  Wuttke 


1496  erschien  in  Koln  als  Universitatslehrbuch  fur  den  Unterricht  der 
Artisten  der  Laurentius-Burse  ein  Kompendium  der  Naturwissenschaft 
in  Ausziigen.  Als  Autor  nennt  es  Gerardus  de  Harderwijk,  einen 
Theologen  der  Laurentius-Burse.  Im  Gedicht  an  den  Leser  bezeichnet  dieser 
sein  Werk  als  neu  und  verkiindet,  man  werde  sagen,  mit  dem  Werk  sei  der 
grofie  Aristoteles  wiedererstanden.  In  der  Schlufischrift  hebt  er  hervor,  das 
Kompendium  stimme  mit  den  Schriften  des  Albertus  Magnus  iiberein,  und 
es  sei  erarbeitet  worden  fiir  alle  diejenigen,  die  den  Text  des  Aristoteles  zu 
verstehen  wiinschten.  Fiir  viele  Studenten  der  Artes  Liberales  zuriickliegender 
Zeiten  sei  dies  Werk  ein  Desiderat  gewesen.  Diese  Angaben  machen  uns 
verstandlich,  dafi  der  Autor  sein  Werk  nicht  nur  Epitomata  =  Ausziige,  son- 
dern  auch  Reparationes  =  Erneuerungen  nennt.  Das  an  den  dafiir  infrage  kom- 
menden  Buchteilen,  namlich  Titelbereich  und  Schlufischrift,  verwendete 
Vokabular  verrat  also  Renaissance-Bewufitsein  des  Autors.  Als  gewollter  Aus- 
druck  von  Modernitat  ist  auch  zu  werten,  dafi  das  Werk  im  Titelbereich  mit 
einem  Gedicht  an  den  Leser  beginnt  und  am  Schlufi  nicht  mit  dem  zum  la- 
teinischen  Kontext  passenden  Wort  "fmis"  schliefit,  sondern  mit  dem  griechi- 
schen  "Telos."  Damit  zeigt  das  Kompendium  eine  gewisse  "humanistische" 
Stilisierung.  Auf  den  ersten  Blick  wird  man  sich  kaum  wundern,  dafi  gerade 
in  Koln  eine  Wiederbelebung  von  Aristoteles  und  Albertus  Magnus  betrieben 
wird,  auf  den  zweiten  Blick  konnten  sich  jedoch  wenigstens  alle  diejenigen 
wundern,  die  Renaissance  und  Humanismus  mit  strikter  Trennung  vom  Mit- 
telalter  identifizieren  und  mit  der  ausschliefilichen  Wiederbelebung  von  Pla- 
ton  und  Pythagoras.  Denn  was  sich  hier  im  Heiligen  Koln  tut  und  in  GefEihr 
steht,  als  einfallslose  Fortdauer  von  Scholastik  angesehen  zu  werden,  ist  durch- 
aus  verallgemeinerungsfahig.  Aber  nicht  dies  Problemfeld,  sondern  eine  wei- 
tere  Beobachtung  an  diesem  Werk  mochte  ich  Ihrer  Aufmerksamkeit  vorlegen. 
Die  Erneuerungen  des  zweiten  Buches  der  Physik  sind  der  Frage  gewidmet, 
aus  welcher  Ursache  Naturwunder  entstehen.  Vier  Ursachen  werden  genannt. 


l82  •  HUMANISMUS  UND  NATURWISSENSCHAFT 

Darunter  diejenige:  Wunder  entstehen  aus  Uberflufi  cin  Materie.  Dazu  werden 
drei  vergangene  Beobachtungen  zusammengestellt  aus  Augustinus,  Albertus 
Magnus  und  Nicolaus  de  Lyra  und  eine  aus  der  Gegenwart,  und  diese  wird 
sogar  ganz  besonders  hervorgehoben.  Es  wird  namlich  hingewiesen  auf  die 
siamesischen  Zwillinge,  die  am  10.  September  1495  in  der  Nahe  von  Worms 
geboren  worden  waren.  Konig  Maximilian  I.  und  andere  Teilnehmer  des  ge- 
rade  in  Worms  tagenden  Reichstages  fanden  dies  Wunder  so  aufregend,  dafi 
sie  es  personlich  besichtigten.  Unser  Autor  fahrt  fort,  ein  gewisser  Mann  habe 
an  den  Kanzler  des  Konigs  in  dieser  Sache  eine  Versspielerei  gerichtet.  Es 
werden  dann  vier  Distichen  zitiert,  die  das  Aussehen  des  Wunders  schildern. 
Bei  dem  Kanzler  handelt  es  sich  um  Conrad  Stiirzel,  bei  dem  "quidam"  um 
den  Doktor  beider  Rechte,  damaligen  Professor  der  Universitat  Basel,  spateren 
Kanzler  der  Reichsstadt  Strafiburg,  um  den  Verfasser  des  Narrenschiffs,  also 
um  den  beriihrnten  Humanisten  Sebastian  Brant.  Brants  Gedicht  iiber  die 
Wormser  Zwillinge  ist  in  verschiedenen  Drucken  erhalten;  es  schildert  nicht 
nur  den  Befund,  sondern  gibt  auch  eine  reichspolitische  Ausdeutung. 

Diese  Beobachtung  im  Kolner  Naturwissenschafts-Kompendium  veranlafit 
mich,  einige  Fragen  zu  stellen  und  Feststellungen  zu  machen:  Wie  pafit  es  zu 
unserem  heutigen  Begriff  von  Naturwissenschaft,  wenn  ein  Theologe  ein  Kom- 
pendium  der  Naturwissenschaft  verfafit  und  wenn  dieser  Beobachtungsbeispiele 
gleichzeitig  aus  dem  Kirchenvater  Augustinus,  dem  Theologen  und  Natur- 
wissenschaftler  Albertus  Magnus,  dem  franziskanischen  Theologen  und  Bi- 
belkommentator  Nicolaus  de  Lyra  und  dem  Humanisten  und  Juristen  Sebastian 
Brant  nimmt?  Wie  verhalt  sich  dazu  unsere  auf  Trennung  ausgehende  Be- 
grifQichkeit?  Hier  Theologie,  hier  Naturwissenschaft,  hier  Geisteswissenschaft, 
hier  auf  einen  Teil  geisteswissenschaftlicher  Facher  festgelegter  Humanismus? 
Wir  stellen  nicht  ohne  Verwunderung  fest,  dafi  ein  an  der  Wiederbelebung 
der  Naturwissenschaftler  Aristoteles  und  Albertus  Magnus  interessierter 
Theologe  und  Naturwissenschaftler  wahrend  des  traditionszugewandten 
Geschaftes  fiir  die  Gegenwart  offen  ist  und  so  eine  bis  in  die  allerjiingste  Ge- 
genwart reichende  Beobachtungskette  herstellt.  Und  er  iibernimmt  diesen 
jiingsten  Befund  aus  dem  Bericht  eines  Humanisten,  eines  Humanisten,  der 
nach  einer  weitverbreiteten  Meinung  der  modernen  Forschung  des  19./20. 
Jahrhunderts  in  puncto  Begriffsinhalt  von  Humanist  hochstens  ein  Verhalt- 
nis  zur  Naturwissenschaft  haben  darf,  und  zwar  ein  kritisches  oder  die  Natur- 
wissenschaften  am  Rande  seiner  Interessen  duldendes  oder  eine  Verbindung 
aus  Kritik  und  Duldung,  der  aber  als  solcher  nicht  zentral  und  wesensmafiig 
Naturwissenschaftler  sein  kann. 

Bei  dem  Humanisten  Sebastian  Brant  woUen  wir  etwas  verweilen.  Wegen 
seiner  Neigung  zu  moralischer  Lehre  hat  er  den  Stempel  "konservativ"  erhalten, 
wegen  seines  deutsch  gedichteten  Narrenschiffs,  in  dem  er  iiberwiegend  ex  ne- 
gativo  lehrt,  hat  man  ihn  zum  Anwalt  der  sogenannten  Verzweiflung  des  aus- 
gehenden  Mittelalters  gemacht,  zum  Norgler  und  Miesepeter,  der  selbst  so 


DIETER  WUTTKE  183 

epochemachenden  Entdeckungen  wie  Buchdruck  und  Amerika  weiter  nichts 
als  Verweigerung  und  Memento  mori  abzugewinnen  wufite,  aber  seine  lateini- 
schen  Schriften  hat  man  selten  oder  nie  gelesen.  Charles  Schmidt,  Verfasser 
einer  verdienstvollen,  1879  erschienenen  elsassischen  Literaturgeschichte, 
gehort  zu  den  wenigen  Lesern  der  lateinischen  Schriften  Brants.  Doch  zweien 
seiner  Gedichte  konnte  er  sich  nur  mit  grofiter  Abscheu  widmen;  Schmidt 
schreibt  dazu:  "Er  hat  seine  Fahigkeit  in  unverzeihbarer  Weise  mifibraucht, 
indem  er  eine  damals  herrschende  Epidemic  beschrieb  [gemeint  ist  die  von 
Schmidt  nicht  genannte  Syphilis]  und  die  Krankheit,  an  der  die  Frau  des  strafi- 
burgischen  Senators  Ludwig  Sturm  litt.  Die  Einzelheiten,  die  er  preisgibt,  sind 
so  abscheulich,  dafi  diese  allein  genii  gen,  ihm  den  Titel  Dichter  im  hoheren 
Sinne  des  Wortes  zu  verweigern."  Zugegebenermafien  kann  es  einem  bei  der 
Lektiire  des  zweiten  Gedichtes  wirklich  schlecht  werden,  aber  es  ist  im  Hin- 
blick  auf  unsere  heutige  Fragestellung  das  mit  Abstand  interessanteste  im  ge- 
samten  Oeuvre  Brants. 

Worum  geht  es  in  dem  Gedicht?  Die  Strafiburgerin  leidet  seit  etwa  acht  Jah- 
ren  an  einer  Blut-  und  Wurmkrankheit.  Diese  aufiert  sich  darin,  dafi  sie  re- 
gelmafiig  grofie  Mengen  Blutes  verliert,  in  dem  sich  Wiirmer  in  erheblicher 
Zahl  befmden.  Begleitet  ist  dieser  Blutverlust  von  schrecklichen  und  schmerz- 
haften  Blahungen.  Wird  sie  an  den  Beinvenen  nicht  ungewohnlich  haufig 
zur  Ader  gelassen,  quillt  Blut  auch  aus  den  Venen.  Trotz  der  Krankheit  hat 
die  Frau  eine  gesunde  Hautfarbe,  und  trotz  der  Krankheit  sieht  sie  sich  nicht 
veranlafit,  ungewohnliche  Mengen  von  Speisen  und  Trank  zu  sich  zu  neh- 
men,  im  Gegenteil,  es  wird  betont,  sie  lebe  besonders  mafiig,  sei  keineswegs 
dem  Rausch  und  der  Schlemmerei  ergeben.  Brant  hat  die  Frau  offensichtlich 
besucht,  genauso  wie  es  der  Leibarzt  Maximilians  I.,  Georgius  Oliverus,  tat. 
Brant  kiimmert  sich  um  die  Lebensweise  der  Frau  mit  dem  Ergebnis,  dafi  keine 
Auffalligkeiten  festzustellen  sind.  Auch  Siinde  als  Krankheitsursache  schei- 
det  aus.  Brant  sucht  bei  den  Arzten  der  Vergangenheit  und  Gegenwart,  ob 
diese  Krankheit  von  einem  beschrieben  wird.  Das  Ergebnis  ist  negativ.  Seine 
Nachforschungen  ergeben  auch,  dafi  mit  so  hohem  regelmafiigem  Blutverlust 
an  sich  kein  Mensch  am  Leben  bleiben  kann. 

Brant  reagiert  auf  diesen  Befund  nun  folgendermafien:  Er  verfafit  eine  poe- 
tische  Erkundigung  in  Distichen,  die  er  an  den  genannten  Arzt  richtet.  Die 
Darstellung  des  Sach verbal tes  begleitet  er  mit  Fragen,  die  den  fiir  uns  so  inter- 
essanten  Teil  des  Gedichtes  ausmachen.  Er  fragt 

a)  nach  der  natiirlichen  Ursache  und  einem  Beweisgang,  diese  befrie- 
digend  zu  erklaren; 

b)  woher  die  vielen  Wiirmer  und  die  ungewohnliche  Menge  des  Blutes 
kamen  und  warum  der  Abgang  nicht  nur  durch  den  Stuhl,  sondern 
auch  durch  Erbrechen  erfolge; 


184  •  HUMANISMUS  UND   NATURWISSENSCHAFT 

c)  wieso  die  Frau  trotz  mafiiger  Ncihrungsaufnahme  am  Leben  bleiben 
konne. 

Damit  erweist  sich  das  Gedicht  als  eine  "quaestio  medicinalis."  Brants  Zutat 
dazu  ist  lediglich,  dafi  er  bekennt,  er  sehe  vorerst  keinen  anderen  Weg  als  den, 
die  Krankheit  als  ein  Wunder  anzusehen.  Ganz  im  Gegensatz  aber  zu  alien 
andern  Wunderberichten,  die  es  aus  seiner  Feder  in  grofier  Zahl  gibt,  fehlt 
hier  jeder  Versuch  einer  Ausdeutung  in  eine  bestimmte  Richtung.  Von  einer 
Antwort  des  Oliverus  ist  bis  heute  nichts  bekannt.  Es  ist  auch  zu  bezweifeln, 
dafi  er  eine  Erklarung  hatte  bieten  und  dafi  er  andere,  "wissenschaftlichere" 
Fragen  als  Brant  hatte  stellen  konnen.  Das  wissenschaftsgeschichtlich  Rele- 
vante  an  Brants  Gedicht  ist,  dafi  er  das  Fragen  im  Sinne  des  Aristoteles  und 
Albertus  Magnus  auf  einen  Fall  der  allerjiingsten  Gegenwart  anwendet  und 
dafi  dieses  Fragen  als  offenes  stehen  bleibt.  Brant  stellt  sich  damit  aus  meiner 
Sicht  in  die  vorderste  Reihe  medizinisch-naturwissenschaftlichen  Fragens  seiner 
Zeit.  Der  Humanist  ist  hier  Naturwissenschaftler;  er  stellt  die  Fragen;  er  sucht 
den  Gedankenaustausch  mit  dem  Experten;  er  halt  den  Fall  literarisch  in  der 
neuen,  an  klassischen  Vorbildern  geschulten  Sprache  fest;  er  schopft  dabei  aus 
dem  Leben  der  Gegenwart  und  fragt  dann  erst  die  Literatur,  was  sie  dazu  sagt, 
und  da  sie  dazu  nichts  sagt,  halt  er  durch  die  literarische  Fixierung  den  Fall 
offen  fiir  kiinftige  Befragung,  sprich  Forschung.  Diese  Befragung  geschah 
durchaus,  und  zwar  durch  den  brandenburgischen  Arzt  Leonard  Thurneis- 
ser,  der  sich  1576  in  einem  Buch  iiber  Krankheitsursachen  damit  beschaf- 
tigte.  Das  Gedicht  ist  also  ein  Dokument  aus  der  Geschichte  des  Entstehens 
einer  auf  Beobachtung  gegenwartiger  Begebnisse  und  Erfahrungen  auf- 
bauenden  Naturwissenschaft,  die  Schritt  fiir  Schritt  und  mit  zunehmender 
Beschleunigung  das  Schatzhaus  iiberlieferten  Wissens  im  Kontakt  mit  den  alten 
Autoritaten  erganzt. 

Wir  sind  heute  geneigt,  solche  Falle,  vor  allem  die  zahlreichen  Berichte  von 
Wundergeburten  und  von  atmospharischen  Wundererscheinungen  in  das  Ku- 
riositatenkabinett  der  Geschichte  des  Aberglaubens  abzudrangen.  Diese  Falle 
gehoren  aber  in  die  Wissenschaftsgeschichte;  denn  sie  waren  samt  und  son- 
ders  emsthafte  Herausforderungen  der  traditionsverhafteten  Schulnaturwissen- 
schaft.  Sie  besonders  haben  das  Fragen  angeregt.  Von  Brant  gibt  es  zu  zwanzig 
Ereignissen,  die  zwischen  1480  und  1521  eintraten,  32  Beschreibungen  und 
Deutungen.  Der  Humanist  Sebastian  Brant  war  also  u.a.  auch  ein  Natur- 
wissenschaftler; keine  Frage,  dafi  er  in  den  Annalen  der  Wissenschaftsgeschich- 
te als  ein  solcher  bis  heute  nicht  verzeichnet  ist, 

Wir  wechseln  den  Schauplatz  und  das  Personal.  Bei  Johannes  Regiomon- 
tanus  gibt  es  auch  aus  heutiger  Sicht  keine  Frage,  dafi  er  Mathematiker  und 
Naturwissenschaftler  war.  1471  zog  er  nach  Niirnberg.  In  der  eigenen  Druck- 
erei  liefi  er  dort  das  aus  der  ersten  Halfte  des  ersten  nachchrisdichen  Jahr- 
hunderts  stammende  fragmentarische  Lehrbuch  der  Astrologie,  da.s  Astronomicon 


DIETER  WUTTKE  185 

des  Marcus  Manilius  erscheinen.  Es  wird  in  einer  Antiqua-Type  gedruckt, 
deren  humanistischer  Charakter  der  Type  der  in  Niirnberg  1501  und  1502 
gedruckten  Celtis-Werke  in  nichts  nachsteht.  Aber  darf  uns  in  diesem  Zusam- 
menhang  iiberhaupt  die  Charakteristik  "humanistisch"  einfallen?  Es  geht  doch 
um  ein  naturwissenschaftliches  Werk.  Humanistisch,  so  haben  wir  gelernt,  hat 
mit  Grammatik,  Rhetorik,  Poesie,  Geschichte  und  Moralphilosophie  zu  tun. 
Also  wer  eine  Grammatik,  eine  Rhetorik  und  Poetik,  wer  Horaz,  Livius  und 
Seneca  herausgibt,  kommentiert  und  in  diesem  Rahmen  Neues  schafft,  ist  ein 
Humanist.  Folglich  kann  die  Bemiihung  um  den  Naturwissenschaftler  Ma- 
nilius, ihn  in  kritisch  gereinigtem  Text  nach  langer  Vergessenheit  der  Mitwelt 
vorzustellen,  als  ein  Renaissancevorgang  begriffen  werden:  Wiederbelebung 
der  Antike  ja,  aber  keine  humanistische.  Humanismus  kann  nur  als  Voraus- 
setzung  akzeptiert  werden,  insofern  Regiomontan  in  klassischer  Grammatik, 
Rhetorik- Stilistik  und  Verslehre  geschult  sein  mufite,  um  die  Aufgabe  zu  erfiil- 
len.  Der  Gegenstand  der  Bemiihung  ist  nicht  humanistisch. 

Die  Manilius-Ausgabe  schliefit  mit  einem  Gedicht  an  den  Leser,  drei  Di- 
stichen,  mit  Sicherheit  von  Regiomontan  selbst  verfafit.  Das  Epigramm,  dem 
die  Kiirze  und  Pragnanz  klassischer  romischer  Dichtung  eignet,  zeigt,  dafi 
Regiomontan  nicht  nur  mit  der  Wahl  seiner  Drucktype  vornliegt,  sondern  dafi 
er  die  zeitgenossische  geistige  Situation  durchschaut,  die  mafigebliche  Dis- 
kussion  kennt  und  dafi  es  ihn  verlangt,  einen  eigenen  Beitrag  dazu  zu  leisten. 
Die  Situation  ist  die  der  Wiederbelebung  klassischer  Literatur,  um  dem  Leben 
der  Gegenwart  neue  fruchtbare  Energien  zuzufiihren  mit  dem  Hauptziel,  eine 
neue  Stufe  der  Veredelung  des  Menschen  zu  erreichen,  die  seiner  Wiirde  als 
eines  Ebenbildes  Gottes  angemessen  ist.  In  dieser  Situation  entbrennt  not- 
wendigerweise  eine  Diskussion  um  das  richtige  Wissen  und  um  die  richtigen 
Wissensvermittler:  Es  ist  also  die  Frage,  ob  Poesie  und,  wenn  ja,  welche  da- 
zugehoren  soil.  Regiomontan  sagt,  Vorsicht  vor  Halbwissern,  die  sich  beson- 
ders  gern  als  Seher  ausgeben.  Sie  weisen  nicht  unbedingt  den  Weg  in  die 
ethische  Erneuerung.  Aber  darum  soil  Poesie  nicht  abgelehnt  sein,  nicht  das 
Programm  der  Wiedererweckung  der  Musen:  Er  spricht  von  der  romischen 
Dichtung  als  "latia  musa."  Doch  sollte  Dichtung  Beachtung  finden,  die  ihre 
Sache  griindlich  lehrt,  Er  bricht  daher,  indem  er  Manilius  fiir  die  Gegenwart 
entdeckt,  eine  Lanze  fur  Lehrdichtung.  Mit  anderen  erkennt  er,  dafi  eine 
besondere  Gefahrdung  fiir  die  moralische  Natur  des  Menschen  in  der  Astro- 
logie  stets  gegeben  ist  und  dafi  von  daher  alle  ethischen  Erneuerungs- 
bestrebungen  danach  trachten  miissen,  dies  Problem  in  den  Griff  zu 
bekommen,  Seine  Meinung  ist:  nur  griindliche  Aufklarung  hilft,  wie  man  sie 
bei  Manilius  fmdet.  Er  erweitert  daher  ganz  konsequent  die  zeitgenossische 
Programmatik  um  diesen  antiken  Lehrdichter,  indem  er  sich  sicher  ist,  dafi 
dies  Werk  der  Wiederbelebung  klassischer  Sprachkultur  — auch  der  poeti- 
schen  — dient  und  gleichzeitig  vom  Gehalt  her  dem  zentralen  Anliegen  ethis- 
cher  Erneuerung.  Was  hindert  uns  nun  eigentlich  noch  aufier  der  Humanismus- 


l86  •  HUMANISMUS  UND   NATURWISSENSCHAFT 

ideologic  eines  Teiles  der  modernen  Forschung,  dies  als  eine  humanistische 
Tat  des  Regiomontan  anzusehen? 

Ein  anderer  Teil  moderner  Forschung  erkennt  durchaus  an:  Wer  cincn  an- 
tikcn  naturwisscnschaftlichen  Text  herausgibt  und/oder  Naturwissenschaft  li- 
terarisch  auf  der  Grundlage  alter  Texte  betreibt,  ist  ein  Humanist.  Schliefilich 
bekannten  sich  die  Humanisten  zur  sapientia  bzw.  philosophia  und  diese  erfor- 
dere  seit  alters  entsprechend  der  ihr  mitgegebenen  Definition  das  Verlangen 
nach  enzyklopadischem  Wissen  und  damit  auch  nach  mathematisch-natur- 
wissenschafdichem.  Aber  der  Humanist  betrachte  das  literarisch  gewonnene 
Wissen  lediglich  als  Grundlagenwissen  fiir  eigene  literarische  Produktionen, 
als  Humanist  gehe  er  den  Weg  in  die  auf  eigenen,  neuen  Berechnungen  und/ 
oder  Erfahrungen  beruhende  Forschung  nicht.  Das  trifft,  wie  gezeigt,  nicht 
fiir  Sebastian  Brant  zu;  es  trifft  nicht  zu  fiir  Conrad  Celtis,  iiber  den  gleich 
noch  gesprochen  werden  soil.  Und  Regiomontan  hatte,  was  hier  nicht  bewiesen 
werden  mufi,  nichts  Eiligeres  zu  tun  als  eben  dies:  zu  eigenen,  neuen  Berech- 
nungen und  Beobachtungen  vorzustofien. 

Ist  Regiomontan  nun  ein  Humanist,  der  zum  Naturwissenschaftler  wurde, 
oder  ein  Naturwissenschaftler  mit  humanistischen  Neigungen?  Oder  ist  er  ganz 
schlicht  ein  Humanist,  der  die  Wahl  getroffen  hat,  sich  vorwiegend  mit  Mathe- 
matik  und  Astronomic  zu  beschaftigen,  weil  das  sein  Beitrag  zur  Erneuerung 
der  Wissenschaft  und  damit  des  Menschen  sein  sollte? 

Bleiben  wir  noch  einen  Augenblick  in  Niirnberg.  Regiomontan  ist  langst 
weggezogen,  ja  inzwischen  verstorben,  als  1487  auf  der  Burg  Conrad  Celtis 
von  Kaiser  Friedrich  III.  als  erster  Deutscher  den  Poetenlorbeer  aufs  Haupt 
gelegt  bekommt.  1486  hatte  dieser  in  seiner  ars  versificandi  das  Amt  des  Dich- 
ters  so  defmiert:  "Amt  des  Dichters  ist  es,  in  Prosa-  und  Verstext,  den  Re- 
defiguren  und  Anmut  auszeichnen,  Sitten,  Handlungen,  Kriegstaten, 
Ortlichkeiten,  Volker,  Bereiche  der  Erde,  Fliisse,  Sternlaufe,  Eigenheiten 
der  Dinge  sowie  Affekte  des  Geistes  und  der  Seele  mit  iibertragenen  Bildern 
nachzuschaffen  und  die  Abbilder  der  Dinge  mit  ausgewahlten  Wortern  und 
stimmigem  wie  angemessenem  Wortmafi  auszudriicken."  Dies  poetische  Pro- 
gramm  einer  in  Wortwahl  und  Rhythmik  sprachlich  anspruchsvollen  Nach- 
schaffung  alles  Wirklichen  halt  die  Tore  weit  auf  fiir  eine  thematisch  in  keiner 
Weise  eingegrenzte  Literatur  wissensvermittelnder  Art.  Es  ist  aufschlufireich 
zu  sehen,  welche  Fahigkeiten  man  aufier  der,  dafi  er  als  neuer  Orpheus  die 
Dichter  nordlich  und  siidlich  der  Alpen  voUkommen  iibertreffe,  aus  Anlaft 
der  Dichterkronung  an  Celtis  hervorhebt:  Von  fernen,  exotischen  Weltge- 
genden  zu  singen  und  von  den  Gestirnen,  die  seiner  Geburt  leuchteten.  Auf 
einen  Begriff  gebracht,  man  feiert  ihn  als  einen  Lehrdichter,  dessen  Feld  die 
Kosmographie  ist.  Welt-  und  Himmelsbeschreibung  wird  auch  kiinftig  von 
ihm  erwartet.  Pafit  diese  historisch  beglaubigte  Erwartung  eigentlich  zu  der 
Erwartung,  die  wir  heute  haben,  wenn  wir  uns  jemanden  und  speziell  Celtis 
als  humanistischen  Dichter  vorstellen?  Die  Geographic,  speziell  die  Kultur- 


DIETER  WUTTKE 


187 


geographic  Deutschlands,  blieb  eines  seiner  Hauptarbeitsgebiete.  In  der  er- 
sten  und  einzigen  zu  seinen  Lebzeiten  gedruckten  Reprasentativausgabe  seiner 
Arbeiten  von  1502  erschienen  nicht  weniger  als  drei  einschlagige  Werke  von 
ihm,  die  den  bei  weitem  grofiten  Raum  in  dem  Band  einnehmen:  1 .  sein  poe- 
tischer  Reisebericht  iiber  seine  Reisen  in  die  vier  Himmelsgegenden  Deutsch- 
lands verbunden  mit  einer  Schilderung  von  vier  Stadien  der  Liebe,  die  den 
vier  Lebenszdtern  eigen  sind,  2.  seine  poetische  allgemeine  Beschreibung 
Deutschlands  und  3.  in  Prosa  seine  Beschreibung  Niirnbergs.  Dies  waren  Vor- 
arbeiten  und  Nebenprodukte  zu  einem  umfassenden  Werk  iiber  Deutschland, 
das  Celtis  unter  dem  Titel  Germania  illustrata,  in  Vers  und  Prosa  abgefafit,  1502 
als  in  Kiirze  fertig  meldet,  1507  unter  seine  Hauptwerke  einreihen  lafit,  von 
dem  sich  der  Nachwelt  jedoch  nichts  erhalten  zu  haben  scheint.  Es  war  sein 
ausdriickliches  Ziel,  mit  diesen  Bemiihungen  die  Liicken  zu  schliefien,  die 
samtliche  vorausgegangenen  Kosmographen  im  Hinblick  auf  Deutschland  ge- 
lassen  hatten.  Celtis  bekannte  sich  zum  Prinzip  der  eigenen  Anschauung,  Be- 
obachtung  und  Erfahrung,  und  dazu  schien  ihm  das  Reisen  unentbehrlich, 
schliefilich  hatten  ja  schon  Moses,  Platon  und  Pythagoras  ihre  Weisheit  we- 
sentlich  auf  Reisen  gewonnen.  Es  kann  kein  Zweifel  bestehen,  dzifi  Celtis,  der 
auch  Globen  und  die  Tabula  Peutingeriana  besessen  hat,  u.a.  ein  Kosmograph 
gewesen  ist,  wie  seine  eigene  Zeit  ihn  auch  sah,  und  dafi  er  als  solcher  in  die 
Wissenschaftsgeschichte  der  Geographic  gehort.  Wenn  es  weiter  sinnvoU  sein 
soil,  ihn  als  Humanisten  zu  bezeichnen,  dann  war  er  auch  als  Kosmograph 
Humanist  und  als  solcher  Naturwissenschaftler. 

Wir  haben  es  bei  dem  Problemkreis,  mit  dem  wir  uns  hier  beschaftigen, 
nicht  nur  mit  der  Frage  zu  tun,  was  bedeutet  Naturwissenschaft  im  Sinne  des 
15. /1 6.  Jahrhunderts,  und  was  Humanismus,  sondern  sogar  auch  mit  der,  was 
bedeutet  Renaissance.  Wir  werden  sehen,  dafi  auch  dieser  moderne  Begriff 
nicht  ausreicht,  um  genau  zu  bezeichnen,  was  sich  wirklich  abgespielt  hat.  Wie- 
dergeburt  der  Antike,  zuerst  der  romischen,  dann  der  griechischen,  dann  der 
hebraischen,  das  sehen  wir  und  meinen  wir  damit.  Aber,  durch  die  Klassiker 
angeregt,  ist  man  gegen  Ausgang  des  15.  Jzihrhunderts  bereits  auf  dem  Wege 
zu  den  noch  weiter  zuriickliegenden  Urspriingen  menschlicher  Weisheit,  die 
man  bei  den  Chaldaern  und  Aegyptern  sieht.  Gleichzeitig  ist  man  dabei,  nicht 
nur  die  Kirchenvater,  sondern  auch  das  Mittelalter  neu  zu  entdecken.  So  ist, 
trotz  des  Verdiktes  von  Enea  Silvio  von  1443,  es  um  1500  durchaus  keine  Ma- 
rotte  des  Heiligen  Koln,  wenn,  wie  eingangs  erwahnt,  Albertus  Magnus  neu 
entdeckt  wird.  Und  Aristoteles  wurde  lange  nicht  so  verachtet,  wie  uns  die 
Schulbiicher  weismachen  wollen.  Es  besteht  eine  weitverbreitete  Meinung,  kri- 
tische  Leistungen  der  Renaissance  nur  in  dem  Bereich  zu  sehen,  den  man 
gewohnlich  fiir  im  engeren  Sinne  humanistisch  ansieht:  also  in  der  Textkri- 
tik.  Vor  neuen  Beobachtungen  aber  und  neuen  Erkenntnissen  sei  die  Renais- 
sance weitgehend  aus  Ehrfurcht  vor  den  antiken  Autoritaten  zuriickgeschreckt. 
Ich  habe  diese  Auffassung  vorhin  schon  im  Zusammenhang  mit  Regiomontan 


l88  HUMANISMUS  UND   NATURWISSENSCHAFT 

und  Celtis  in  Frage  stellen  wollen,  als  ich  ihr  Drangen  auf  Beobachtung  und 
auf  Ausfiillung  von  Liicken  hervorhob.  In  der  Tat  ging  es  ihnen  und  anderen 
fiihrenden  Zeitgenossen  und  ging  es  einem  Kiinsder  wie  Diirer  iiber  die  Wie- 
derbelebung  hinaus  zugleich  um  jenes  Mehr  auf  alien  Gebieten,  das  der  Be- 
griff  Renaissance  nicht  mehr  abdeckt.  Es  ging  nicht  nur  um  Wiedergeburt, 
sondern  auch  um  Uberrundung,  Uberbietung.  Und  ich  mochte  die  For- 
mulierung  wagen,  es  waren  unter  den  Gelehrten,  den  Kiinsdern  und  unter 
den  gelehrten  Geistlichen  und  Politikern  die  Humanisten,  die  dies  zuallererst 
wollten.  Mein  verehrter  Kollege  Friedrich  Ohly  sieht  wie  ich  das  Defizit  des 
Renaissancebegriffes  und  schlagt  vor,  in  diesem  Falle  die  Typologie  als  eine 
geschichtlich  wirksame  Kraft  zu  erkennen. 

Ich  soUte  den  Gedankengang  nicht  ohne  einige  Konkretisierungen  aus  dem 
Bereich  mathematisch-naturwissenschafdicher  Fachliteratur  verlassen.  1492  gab 
Johannes  Lucilius  Santritter  aus  Heilbronn  in  Venedig  die  beriihmten  Al- 
phonsinischen  Tafeln  heraus.  Anstelle  einer  Einleitung,  auch  eines  Gedichtes 
an  den  Leser,  beginnt  der  Druck  mit  einem  "Ermunterungs"-Brief  des  beriihm- 
ten Olmiitzer  Humanisten  Augustinus  Moravus  an  Santritter,  den  dieser  mit 
einem  entsprechenden  Schreiben  beantwortet.  Augustinus  Moravus  darf  man 
mit  Sicherheit  zu  den  Humanisten  rechnen,  die  sich  in  die  iibliche  Defmition 
des  Humanisten  einfiigen.  Um  so  iiberraschter  darf  man  sein,  wenn  man  ge- 
wahr  wird,  wie  er  die  kulturelle  Situation  der  eigenen  Zeit  bewertet.  Er  aufiert 
das  Gliick,  in  einer  Zeit  leben  zu  diirfen,  in  der  nach  dem  Niedergang  bei- 
nahe  alle  Wissenschaften  —  er  nennt  sie  "optimae  disciplinae"  —  wiedererwachten 
und  fast  bessere  Frucht  als  friiher  gaben.  Er  meint,  die  Alten  miifiten  sich 
eigentlich  im  Grabe  freuen,  konnten  sie  dies  bemerken.  Da  der  Vorgang  in 
alien  Wissenschaften  mit  unglaublicher  Schnelligkeit  vonstatten  gegangen  sei, 
sei  es  kein  Wunder,  da  alle  sich  auf  die  eine  Sache  konzentrierten,  dafi  einige 
sogar  die  Bahnen  der  anderen  verliefien  und,  wie  man  sage,  auf  eigene  Faust 
an  bisher  Unbekanntes  und  Unversuchtes  herangingen.  Dies  hatten  Georg 
Peurbach  und  Johannes  Regiomontanus  getan,  deutsche  Manner,  die  in  der 
lateinischen  und  fast  ebenso  in  der  griechischen  Sprache  gebildet  seien.  Der 
Humanist  wiirdigt  also  die  eigene  Zeit  als  eine  Renaissance  2iller  Wissenschaften 
und  hebt  hervor,  dafi  zwei  Astronomen  in  ihrem  Feld  alles  bisher  dagewesene 
Wissen  iibertroffen  haben.  Und  der  Antwortbrief  des  Santritter  liegt  auf  der- 
selben  Linie.  Johannes  Schoner  entschuldigt  sich  1515  in  seiner  Luculentissima 
quaedam  terrae  totius  descriptio,  dafi  er  dem  Ptolemaios  nicht  vollig  gefolgt  sei, 
sondern  es  gewagt  habe,  "noua  scribere."  Uberhaupt  ist  das  Wort  neu,  novus, 
das  Leitwort  seiner  Intentionen. 

Lassen  Sie  uns  mit  einem  kurzen  Erkundungsgang  abschliefien,  der  uns 
durch  einige  sogenannte  humanistische  Programmschriften  fiihrt  und  nach 
deren  Bewertung  der  Wissenschaften  fragt.  Enea  Silvio  schreibt  am  5.  De- 
zember  1443  einen  Ian  gen  Brief  iiber  humanistische  Fiirstenerziehung  an  Her- 
zog  Sigismund  von  Osterreich.  Darin  ist  nicht  eine  WissenschEift  aus  dem 


DIETER  WUTTKE  189 

"Programm"  ausgeschlossen,  also  keineswegs  etwa  die  Naturwissenschaften. 
Und  am  Schlufi  empfiehlt  Enea  dem  Fiirsten  ausdriicklich,  die  lebendige  Le- 
benserfahrung  zu  suchen.  Er  sagt:  "Denn  ich  weifi,  dafi  es  von  Nutzen  ist,  was 
die  Menschen  aus  Biichern  gelernt  haben,  in  der  Ausiibung  zu  erproben." 
1476  halt  Rudolf  Agricola  eine  Rede  zum  Lob  der  Philosophie  und  der  iibri- 
gen  Kiinste.  In  dies  Lob  ist  das  gesamte  Quadrivium  ohne  jeden  Abstrich  ein- 
bezogen  in  einer  Weise,  die  den  spateren  Conrad  Celtis  als  getreuen  Schiller 
Agricolas  erkennen  lafit.  Und  die  Bemiihungen  um  das  Gesamt  der  Wissen- 
schaft  werden  von  Agricola  "studia  humanitatis"  genannt.  Ganz  im  Sinne  der 
Genannten  hat  Celtis  immer  wieder  den  Sachinhalt  der  Bildung  in  der  Beriick- 
sichtigung  aller  Wissenschaften  gesehen  und  hat  sich  fiir  personliche  Erfah- 
rung  mit  Nachdruck  ausgesprochen.  Ich  iibergehe  die  Ubereinstimmung,  die 
er  mit  anderen  hat  und  hebe  nur  noch  Philipp  Melanchthon,  den  protestanti- 
schen  Praeceptor  Germamiae,  hervor.  Zwischen  1517  und  1549  hat  dieser  ver- 
schiedene  Deklamationen  verfafit,  in  denen  er  die  Beriicksichtigung  aller 
Wissenschaften  propagiert.  Sie  sind  fiir  ihn  — nach  altem,  aus  der  Antike  stam- 
mendem  Herkommen  — in  dem  Begriff philosophia  zuszimmengefafit,  und  diese 
philosophia  nennt  er  auch  "humanae  disciplinae,"  "scientia  optimarum  artium," 
"honestae  artes,"  "optimae  disciplinae,"  und  er  erortert  mehrfach,  warum  es 
fiir  einen  jeden  Theologen  unumganglich  ist,  gerade  auch  mit  der  Mathematik 
und  der  Himmelskunde  sich  zu  befassen,  wobei  er  letztere  "illas  pulcherrimas 
artes  de  motibus  siderum"  nennt.  Horen  wir  die  Begriindung,  die  er  am  Schlufi 
seiner  Rede  iiber  Aristoteles  gibt:  "Gott  will,  dafi  die  Natur  angeschaut  wird, 
in  die  er  bestimmte  Spuren  eingedriickt  hat,  um  erkannt  zu  werden:  Er  hat 
die  Wissenschaften  gegeben,  nicht  nur,  damit  sie  Lebenshilfen  sind,  sondern 
viel  eher,  damit  sie  uns  an  den  Schopfer  jener  Ordnung  gemahnen,  die  im 
Geiste  des  Menschen  verankert  ist,  die  z.  B.  Gut  und  Bose  trennt.  Wahr  ist 
namlich  jener  wunderbare  Ausspruch  Platons,  dafi  Gottes  Ruhm  in  den  Wis- 
senschaften ausgestreut  liegt." 

Damit  konnte  moglicherweise  deutlich  geworden  sein,  dafi  ich  mit  der  The- 
menstellung  meines  heutigen  Vortrages  "Beobachtungen  zum  Verhdltnis  von  Hu- 
manismus  und  Naturwissenschaft"  ein  Irrlicht  angeziindet  habe,  und  dafi  ich 
mich  dafiir  entschuldigen  mufi.  Im  deutschen  humanistischen  Lager  gibt  es  im 
157 16.  Jahrhundert  keine  Trennung  von  Humanismus  und  Naturwissenschaft. 


Anmerkung 


*Eine  ausfiihrlichere  und  mit  Anmerkungen  versehene  Fassung  des  Vortrages  erscheint  anfolgender 
Stelle:  Via  scientiae  renascentis.  Naturwissenschaft  auf  dem  Weg  von  Johannes  von  Gmunden  zu 
Johannes  Kepler.  Hrsg.  von  Helmuth  Grossing.  Wien  1987.  Darin  versuche  ich  auch, 
eine  neue  formelhafte  Definition  des  Renaissance-Humanismus  zu  geben. 


HISTORY 

AND 

HISTORY     OF     SCIENCE 


Andreas  Alciatus  and  Boniface  Amerbach: 
The  Chronicle  of  a  Renaissance  Friendship 

Virginia  Woods  Callahan 

For  a  number  of  years  my  work  has  been  concentrated  on  the  Emblems 
of  Andreas  Alciatus,  the  great  sixteenth  century  professor  of  jurispru- 
dence. At  the  First  International  Congress  of  Neo-Latin  Studies  at  Lou- 
vain  in  1971  I  gave  a  paper  on  the  friendship  of  Alciatus  and  Erasmus.  Since 
then  I  have  become  increasingly  interested  in  Alciatus  the  man.  After  reading 
and  rereading  the  exchange  of  letters  between  Alciatus  and  Boniface  Amer- 
bach I  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  personality  of  Alciatus  is  singu- 
larly revealed  in  their  friendship. 

On  June  7,  1932,  P.  S.  Allen,  to  whom  we  owe  the  monumental  edition 
of  the  letters  of  Erasmus,  delivered  a  lecture  at  the  University  of  Glasgow  on 
"The  Correspondence  of  an  Early  Printing  House  — The  Amerbachs  of  Basle," 
in  which  he  charmingly  sketched  the  activities  of  Johannes  Amerbach  and  his 
three  sons,  Bruno,  Basil,  and  Boniface.^  At  the  end  of  the  lecture  he  described 
the  letters  collected  by  Boniface  as  a  "rich  vein  to  be  worked."  In  conclusion 
he  said:  "If  a  scholar  is  found  to  work  on  these  letters,  he  will  have  his  rewards 
in  knowing  that  through  his  labours  there  shines  a  more  abundant  light.  It 
would  be  a  happy  thing  if  this  lecture  should  move  some  scholar  to  grasp  at 
opportunity.  (Post  est  Occasio  calva.y 

In  that  very  same  year  the  Basel  classical  scholar,  Alfred  Hartmann,  under- 
took the  huge  project  of  a  complete  critical  edition  of  the  letters.  By  the  time 
of  his  death  in  1960  five  volumes  had  been  published.  Fortunately  another  Basel 
scholar.  Beat  Rudolf  Jenny,  was  able  to  complete  the  edition  of  Die  Amerbach- 
korrespondenz.^  It  is  thanks  to  the  efforts  of  these  men  that  one  is  able  to  chron- 
icle the  friendship  of  Alciatus  and  Boniface,  which  is  the  subject  of  my  paper 
today. 

Our  story  begins  in  1519  with  Boniface  Amerbach's  decision  to  go  to  Avig- 
non to  attend  the  lectures  of  Andreas  Alciatus,  who  had  been  appointed  pro- 
fessor of  civil  law  there  in  1518.  In  June  1519,  he  wrote  to  Ulrich  Zasius,  with 
whom  he  had  studied  law  in  Freiburg,  to  tell  him  of  his  decision.  He  reminded 


194  ANDREAS  ALCIATUS  AND  BONIFACE  AMERBACH 

Zasius  of  his  brother  Bruno's  enthusiastic  report  of  Alciatus  when  he  visited 
him  the  previous  year,  commenting  that  it  would  take  long  to  rehearse  Al- 
ciatus' eruditio,  humanitas,  and  comitas  (AK  660).  The  two  words,  eruditio  and 
humanitas,  Boniface  was  to  use  again  and  again  in  other  letters  to  and  about 
Alciatus.  With  his  letter  Boniface  enclosed  one  from  Alciatus  to  Zasius.  In  Sep- 
tember Zasius'  wife  died  of  the  plague  and  he  asked  Boniface  to  be  his  Achates 
in  responding  to  Alciatus.  Boniface  thus  became  the  intermediary  between  Al- 
ciatus and  Zasius,  who  praised  Alciatus  for  being  totally  concerned  with  an- 
cient jurisprudence,  prophesying  that  he  would  illuminate  civil  law  with  truth, 
if  anyone  would  (AK  681). 

On  October  7  Boniface  wrote  to  Erasmus  announcing  his  intention  to  study 
with  Alciatus.  There  is  a  plague  in  Basel,  but  he  hopes  to  set  out  shortly  for 
Avignon.  He  writes  of  Alciatus: 

I  know  of  no  other  man  with  such  a  knowledge  of  the  law.  You  can  judge 
the  man  from  his  works  published  recently  in  Milan.  You  will  see,  added 
to  his  knowledge  of  the  law,  his  command  of  both  languages.  I  would 
say  that  he  and  our  Zasius  are  the  two  deans  of  law,  not  only  in  the  emen- 
dation of  texts,  but  in  the  arena  itself.  (AK  694) 

On  October  22  Bruno  Amerbach  died  of  the  plague.  Three  days  later  Bon- 
iface wrote  to  Alciatus: 

I  had  decided  to  go  to  Avignon,  Alciatus,  unique  glory  [decus]  of  the  law, 
because  of  your  presence  there,  but  on  the  very  day  on  which  I  would 
have  set  off  my  brother  Bruno,  whom  you  knew,  was  killed  by  the  plague. 
I  have  been  deprived  of  a  brother,  and  you,  too,  most  famous  man,  have 
suffered  a  loss.  He  never  ceased  commending  your  singular  erudition 
and  humanity.  I  have  been  deprived  of  a  most  sweet  brother  and  denied 
the  opportunity  to  join  you  and  partake  of  your  great  learning.  (AK  697) 

Boniface,  remaining  in  Basel  to  attend  to  family  affairs,  delayed  his  depar- 
ture until  May  1 ,  1520,  reaching  Avignon  on  May  11.  In  a  letter  to  his  brother 
Basil  he  described  his  reception  by  Alciatus: 

He  kept  me  at  his  house  from  the  first  greeting  and  refreshed  me  at  his 
table,  doing  all  that  a  parent  or  brother  would  do.  I  could  have  moved 
into  his  house,  except  that  I  am  unwilling  to  burden  the  man  so  much. 
However,  I  am  with  him  daily.  In  short,  I  consider  him  the  best  of  men. 
(AK  739) 

Two  months  later  he  wrote  again  to  Basil:  "Alciatus'  good  will  is  omnipresent. 
He  cherishes  me,  and  the  result  of  his  affection  is  that  he  scarcely  lets  me  leave 
his  side,  doing  everything  for  my  sake"  (AK  741). 

It  is  pleasant  to  visualize  those  halcyon  days  in  Avignon,  keeping  in  mind 
that  Alciatus  (b.  1492)  was  only  three  years  older  than  Boniface.  Thanks  to 


VIRGINIA  WOODS  CALLAHAN 


195 


Hans  Holbein,  who  painted  a  magnificent  portrait  of  Boniface  in  September 
1519,  we  have  a  clear  idea  of  his  appearance  at  that  time.'^  (There  are,  alas, 
no  portraits  of  Alciatus  as  a  young  man.)  Boniface's  remembrance  of  Alciatus' 
kindness  to  him  was  to  color  all  the  subsequent  phases  of  their  friendship. 

From  Avignon  Boniface  wrote  to  a  number  of  persons  engaged  in  the  pub- 
lishing business  in  Basel.  On  July  13,  1520,  he  wrote  to  Johannes  Froben  of 
Alciatus'  skill  in  both  languages,  observing  that  Alciatus  "toils  night  and  day 
to  restore  legal  studies  to  their  pristine  condition"  (AK  742).  This  is  a  theme 
often  repeated  in  Boniface's  letters,  one  that  later  on  would  be  affixed  to  a  num- 
ber of  portraits  of  Alciatus.  Froben  was  told  that  Alciatus  had  works  for  pub- 
lication in  case  he  would  be  interested  in  them,  and  that  Boniface  wanted  to 
do  whatever  he  could  to  be  helpful  in  this  matter.  He  added  that  Alciatus  de- 
nied him  nothing,  being  a  man  born  to  love  him. 

On  January  25,  1521,  Boniface  sent  some  manuscripts  of  Alciatus  to  An- 
dreas Cratander,  another  printer  and  bookseller  in  Basel.  At  the  beginning 
of  February  he  wrote  to  Claudius  Cantiuncula,  professor  of  civil  law  at  the 
University  of  Basel,  expressing  the  hope  that  he  would  influence  Cratander 
to  publish  some  of  Alciatus'  works,  since  he  was  near  at  hand. 

That  Alciatus  was  not  unaware  of  Boniface's  attempts  at  such  negotiations 
is  clear  from  a  letter  that  he  wrote  to  his  friend  Franciscus  Calvus  September 
1520:  "The  booksellers  in  Basel  are  prevailing  on  me  to  send  my  works,  emended 
and  corrected,  for  reprinting.  I  have  been  urged  on  in  this  by  Boniface  Am- 
erbach,  who  is  soldiering  under  my  banner  in  Avignon."^  Boniface's  involve- 
ment with  the  publication  of  Alciatus'  works  was  to  be  a  life-long  preoccupation, 
for  in  keeping  with  Alciatus'  wishes  he  supervised  not  only  those  works  pub- 
lished by  Cratander  and  the  Frobens,  but  also  those  published  by  Bebel,  J. 
Herwagen,  and  Isengrin.  The  details  relating  to  these  publications  make  up 
a  large  part  of  the  Alciatus-Boniface  correspondence. 

In  the  spring  of  1521,  Alcatius  and  Boniface  left  Avignon  because  of  the 
plague.  In  April  Boniface  on  his  way  home,  wrote  from  Lyons,  to  Alciatus, 
already  in  Milan: 

May  the  gods  make  it  possible  for  me  to  see  you  again  soon,  for  because 
of  your  absence  I  seem  to  have  lost  the  other  half  of  my  soul.  Nothing 
is  more  revered  by  me  that  your  erudition,  nothing  more  worthy  of  re- 
spect that  your  humanttas,  nothing  sweeter  than  your  companionship.  In 
the  meantime  I  would  like  you  to  remember  me  as  your  disciple  and  fol- 
lower, completely  devoted  to  you  with  my  whole  heart,  and  I  ask,  for 
the  sake  of  legal  studies,  which  you  alone  can  cure,  that  you  apply  your- 
self to  them,  since  now  you  can  do  that  easily  without  distraction.  (AK 
780) 

In  an  exchange  of  letters  during  the  summer  of  1521,  Boniface  described 
at  some  length  the  unrest  in  Germany  because  of  the  Lutheran  controversy 


196  ANDREAS  ALCIATUS  AND  BONIFACE  AMERBACH 

and  Alciatus  reported  that  in  Italy  everything  was  in  a  state  of  flux  because 
of  the  conflict  between  the  Emperor  Charles  V  and  King  Francis  I.  Boniface, 
reacting  to  Alciatus'  fears  about  the  imminent  war,  wrote  that  if  Alciatus  was 
not  able  to  return  to  Avignon,  he  might  go  to  Bologna  or  Padua,  but  that  as 
long  as  Alciatus  continued  to  teach  he  would  follow  him.  On  August  18  he 
wrote:  "I  follow  you  in  my  mind;  to  hear  you  I  would  willingly  follow  you  to 
the  pillars  of  Hercules"  (AK  807).  By  November  the  plague  had  subsided  and 
Alciatus  returned  to  Avignon,  but  Boniface  was  unable  to  leave  Basel  until 
May  1,  1522.  He  and  Alciatus  were  joyfully  reunited  on  May  29,  1522,  at 
Chateauneuf,  where  Alciatus  had  gone  because  of  a  recurrence  of  plague  at 
Avignon. 

While  Boniface  was  in  Basel  he  had  assisted  Cratander  with  the  printing 
of  Alciatus'  Paradoxa,  and  he  had  performed  an  even  more  important  service 
for  Alciatus.  Before  going  to  Avignon,  Alciatus  had  written  a  treatise  harshly 
criticizing  the  monastic  life.  His  friend  Calvus,  he  claimed,  had  taken  it  from 
his  papers  without  his  consent.  Alciatus  feared  that  Calvus  had  given  the  man- 
uscript to  Erasmus  and  that  Erasmus  might  have  sent  it  to  Froben  to  be  printed. 
On  September  5,  1521,  Alciatus  wrote  to  Boniface  from  Milan  asking  him  to 
implore  Erasmus  to  burn  the  treatise  lest  it  fall  into  the  wrong  hands.  Boniface 
wrote  promptly  to  Erasmus  who  replied  that  Alciatus  had  no  reason  to  worry. 
On  December  14,  1521,  Erasmus  himself  wrote  to  Alciatus:  "As  for  your  de- 
clamation, I  have  taken  care  that  it  not  be  given  to  anyone  except  one  trust- 
worthy little  friend,  so  in  this  matter  you  may  sleep  on  both  ears."^  Alciatus 
was  overjoyed  to  receive  a  letter  from  Erasmus  for  which  he  was  "eternally  grate- 
ful" to  Boniface.  Boniface  protested  that  he  deserved  little  thanks  for  having 
interposed  himself  between  two  select  minds,  so  that  they  might  be  joined  in 
the  bond  of  friendship. 

The  felicitous  result  of  this  comedy  of  errors  was  that  the  Erasmus- Alciatus 
friendship  was  initiated.  Erasmus  was  later  to  refer  to  Alciatus  with  admira- 
tion in  his  Adagia,^  and  in  1528  in  his  Ciceronianus  had  Alciatus  described  as 
"the  ablest  of  jurists  in  the  rank  of  orators  and  the  best  of  orators  in  the  rank 
of  jurists."^  Delighted  by  these  tributes  Alciatus  declared  to  Boniface  that  Er- 
asmus had  given  him  "eternity  and  fame." 

In  1530  the  matter  of  the  treatise  was  to  reemerge  when  Alciatus,  then  at 
Bourges,  was  being  attacked  by  jealous  rivals  whom  he  called  "crows  and  vul- 
tures." He  was  afraid  his  enemies  might  use  the  treatise  against  him.  Again  Bon- 
iface intervened,  and  on  March  31,  1531,  Erasmus  insisted  that  he  had  burned 
the  treatise  and  that  Alciatus  had  thanked  him  for  doing  so.  This  time,  he  wrote, 
Alciatus  could  sleep  not  only  on  botli  ears,  but  with  both  eyes  closed.^ 

But  now  we  must  return  to  our  chronicle.  After  the  two  returned  to  Avig- 
non in  June  1522  their  time  together  was  brief.  Alciatus  in  October  of  that 
year,  not  being  paid  a  full  stipend,  decided  to  return  to  Milan.  Boniface  ex- 
pressed his  dismay  at  his  friend's  departure  in  a  letter  to  Basil.  He  was  un- 


VIRGINIA  WOODS  CALLAHAN  I97 

certain  as  to  what  he  should  do,  since  he  was  deprived  of  his  best  friend  and 
most  erudite  preceptor.  Nothing  was  sweeter  for  him  than  their  daily  com- 
panionship, nothing  more  glorious  than  his  learned  lectures.  There  is  no  ev- 
idence that  Alciatus  and  Boniface  ever  met  again.  Boniface  remained  in  Avignon 
until  1524.  His  desire  to  join  Alciatus  thwarted  by  the  war  in  Italy,  he  reluc- 
tantly took  his  degree  under  the  sponsorship  of  Franciscus  Ripa,  February  4, 
1525.  Alciatus  returned  to  Avignon  at  the  end  of  1527. 

In  retrospect  Alciatus  referred  to  his  four  years  in  Italy  (1523-1527)  as  "the 
inglorious  years."  He  had  no  academic  post  and  no  means  of  publishing  in 
his  homeland,  since  his  Italian  publisher  A.  Minuziano  was  ill.  However,  re- 
lieved of  the  demands  of  teaching,  he  was  able  to  devote  himself  to  writing. 
On  May  10,  1523,  he  informed  Boniface  that  a  number  of  his  "literary"  works 
were  ready  for  printing.  He  mentioned  among  them  his  Emblemata,  two  pages 
of  which  he  was  sending  to  Boniface  for  tasting  {gustus  causa)  (AK  918).  This 
letter  is  of  some  importance  for  those  interested  in  how  the  emblems  came  into 
being.  On  January  9,  1523,  Alciatus  had  informed  Calvus  that  he  had  written 
some  "emblems"  as  a  New  Year's  gift  for  a  certain  Ambrogio  Visconti.^^  Nev- 
ertheless, in  his  letter  to  Boniface  he  designated  his  friend  Aurelius  Albutius 
as  the  auctor  of  the  emblems,  and  Visconti  as  the  inventor}^  Boniface  was  not 
taken  in  by  the  ruse.  When  he  thanked  Alciatus  for  the  two  sheets  he  wrote 
that  the  emblems  expressed  Alciatus'  taJent  to  a  tee  (ad  assem)  and  that  he  hoped 
that  Alciatus  would  commend  him  to  "the  man  of  many  names,"  (AK  925) 
that  is,  to  Alciatus  himself.  It  was  Alciatus'  emblems  that  were  to  give  him 
more  fame  in  our  time  than  his  legal  writings. 

Boniface  continued  to  relay  to  Alciatus  Froben's  desire  to  print  whatever 
works  he  had  available.  By  1525,  because  of  the  invasion  by  imperial  troops 
into  Italy,  it  was  risky  to  send  material  to  Germany.  By  1526  the  calamities 
of  war  had  touched  Alciatus  personally.  On  August  12,  1526,  Alciatus  reported 
to  Boniface  that  Iberian  mercenaries  were  billeted  in  his  house,  that  he  was 
expected  to  feed  them,  and  that  he  was  not  allowed  to  remove  anything  from 
his  library.  Furthermore,  no  one  was  permitted  to  leave  the  city  (AK  1132). 
It  was  not  until  the  autumn  of  1527  that  Alciatus  managed  to  flee  to  Avignon, 
financially  depleted,  and  without  his  books,  notes,  and  manuscripts.  On  De- 
cember 26,  he  referred  to  his  misfortunes  in  Italy  with  some  humor.  He  wrote: 
"When  there  was  nothing  left,  I  fmally  snatched  myself  away,  leaving  behind 
an  empty  house  with  the  inscription:  'Go  elsewhere,  stomachs!  the  Spanish  thief 
has  left  nothing  here!'  "  (AK  1222). 

In  this  same  letter,  the  first  since  his  return  from  Italy,  Alciatus  wrote  that 
he  was  pleased  that  Boniface  was  now  professor  of  law  in  Basel.  He  rejoiced 
that  Boniface  had  chosen  the  academic  life  instead  of  the  mere  practice  of  law. 
"For,"  he  wrote,  "with  your  learning  you  will  help  others  and  open  up  the  way 
of  truth  for  yourself,  a  thing  which  does  not  usually  befall  lawyers,  who  are 
devoted  not  to  truth,  but  to  their  own  cause." 


198  ANDREAS  ALCIATUS  AND   BONIFACE  AMERBACH 

In  the  spring  of  1528  there  was  a  moving  exchange  of  letters.  About  the  mid- 
dle of  April  Boniface,  commiserating  with  Alciatus  for  all  that  he  had  gone 
through,  expressed  his  confidence  in  Alciatus'  "innate  nobility  of  spirit"  which 
had  shown  him  to  be  a  philosopher,  not  only  in  name  but  in  fact  (AK  1253). 
Alciatus  was  seemingly  much  affected  by  these  words,  and  he  replied  May  26, 
1528.  He  began  by  saying  how  gratified  he  had  been  by  the  letter,  which  had 
been  written  with  such  erudition  and  sweetness,  representing  Boniface  him- 
self, a  man  of  learning,  character,  humanitas,  and  incomparable  affection.  And 
he  wrote: 

As  God  as  my  witness,  nothing  has  been  given  to  me  this  year  more  hap- 
pily! No  source  of  healing,  no  medicine  could  have  been  more  respons- 
ible for  arousing  my  mind.  I,  who  had  almost  succumbed  to  all  the  violent 
worries,  was  so  lifted  up  by  your  sweet  encouragement,  that  I  already 
begin  to  stand  firm  and  point  my  middle  finger  at  fortune  herself.  (AK 
1261) 

In  this  letter  he  also  deplored  the  horrors  that  their  Italy  and  Germany  had 
been  subjected  to,  but  like  the  true  humanist  that  he  was,  he  maintained  that 
his  one  consolation  was  that  new  studies  were  being  produced. 

At  the  beginning  of  March  1529,  Alciatus  informed  Boniface  that  the  mag- 
istrates in  Avignon  were  being  difficult  about  his  stipend  and  that  he  was  con- 
sidering an  offer  from  Bourges.  By  March  28  he  was  writing  from  an  inn  in 
Lyons,  announcing  that  he  was  on  his  way  to  Bourges.  On  May  7  he  noted 
that  he  had  left  the  city  without  saying  goodbye  to  anyone  except  to  one  man 
who  was  a  friend  of  Erasmus.  He  described  his  arrival  in  Bourges  as  a  triumph. 
The  four  years  there  were  much  to  his  liking:  he  had  a  large  stipend,  many 
students,  and  the  patronage  and  munificence  of  King  Francis  I. 

For  Boniface  these  years  were  a  time  of  peril  and  uncertainty  because  of  the 
violence  of  the  religious  dissension  in  Basel.  In  several  letters  Alciatus  expressed 
his  fears  for  his  friend's  safety,  declaring  that  Boniface's  calamities  were  his 
own.  On  January  20,  1530,  for  example,  he  urged  Boniface  to  keep  in  mind 
that  there  was  nothing  that  he  would  not  do  for  his  sake.  He  wrote:  "You  are 
so  firmly  fixed  in  my  mind,  that  I  consider  no  one  closer"  (AK  1408).  Bo- 
niface's position  was  especially  precarious  because  he  could  not  bring  himself 
to  conform  to  the  reformed  eucharistic  service.  It  was  not  until  1534  that  a 
compromise  was  arranged  with  the  city  council  that  allowed  him  to  retain  his 
citizenship. 

During  Alciatus'  years  in  Bourges,  Boniface  wrote  that  because  of  his  fame 
he  was  besieged  by  requests  for  recommendations  to  him.  A  number  of  these 
survive  as  models  of  tactful  persuasion.  Boniface  took  these  opportunities  to 
praise  Alciatus  for  his  untiring  efforts  in  behalf  of  his  students,  surely  an  echo 
of  Alciatus'  treatment  of  him  in  Avignon.  Alciatus  responded  with  pleasure. 
His  letters  had  a  kind  of  format  now.  After  the  initial  greeting  and  acknow- 
ledgement of  letters  and  material  received,  the  problems  connected  with  works 


VIRGINIA  WOODS  CALLAHAN  I99 

being  printed  were  discussed.  There  was  usually  an  inquiry  about  the  health 
and  activities  of  Erasmus  and  a  request  for  information  about  any  new  hu- 
manistic publications.  Often  Boniface  was  asked  to  procure  books  that  were 
not  available  in  France.  The  appended  lists  of  these  books  give  us  some  in- 
sight into  Alciatus'  literary  interests. 

In  April  1533  Alciatus  informed  Boniface  that  he  was  being  recalled  to  Italy 
by  Francesco  Sforza  who  had  been  restored  to  the  Dukedom  in  Milan  by  Charles 
V.  On  August  20,  1533,  Alciatus  wrote  to  the  Duke  thanking  him  for  nom- 
inating him  professor  at  the  University  of  Pavia.  On  October  20  Alciatus  listed 
for  Boniface  his  reasons  for  returning  to  his  homeland.  He  hoped  that  the  cli- 
mate would  be  more  favorable;  he  had  thought  it  unwise  to  disobey  the  Duke 
who  had  promised  him  a  large  stipend  and  senatorial  rank.  He  began  his  teach- 
ing at  Pavia  on  November  1,  1533,  and  thus  the  Alciatus-Boniface  relation- 
ship entered  into  a  new  phase. 

During  the  last  seventeen  years  of  his  life  Alciatus  taught  at  three  Italian 
universities.^^  Time  forces  me  to  forego  the  details  of  the  letters  of  this  per- 
iod. Communications  between  Italy  and  Germany  were  difficult,  but  Alciatus 
took  every  opportunity  to  write  to  Boniface  when  a  messenger  was  available. 
Boniface  relayed  messages  to  and  from  Herwagen  and  Isengrin.  The  old  friends 
assured  each  other  of  their  continued  mutual  affection. 

In  1548  Boniface  had  arranged  for  Alciatus  to  become  a  consultamt  in  a  legal 
matter  for  Duke  Ulrich  of  Wurttemburg.  Alciatus  was  still  working  on  his  re- 
sponsum  for  the  case  when  he  died  on  January  12,  1550.  Boniface,  having  learned 
of  the  death  through  Milanese  merchants  living  in  Basel,  wrote  immediately 
to  the  younger  Duke  Christoph.  The  sad  news,  he  wrote,  was  a  personal  blow 
for  him  for  he  had  lost  a  close  and  dear  friend;  it  had  brought  back  memories 
of  their  joint  legal  studies  (AK  3238). 

A  clue  to  Alciatus'  concept  of  friendship  can  be  found  in  his  De  Verborum  Sig- 
nificatione  published  by  S.  Gryphius  in  Lyons,  1530.  In  his  explanation  of  the 
word  "friends"  he  says  it  means  those  non  leviter  coniunctos  —  two  bodies  in  one 
soul.  He  refers  to  Lucian's  dialogue  on  friendship  Toxaris  in  which  Toxaris  tells 
why  the  Scythians  erected  a  monument  to  two  Greeks,  Orestes  and  Pylades: 
they  were  the  symbol  of  loyal  friendship.^ 

Is  there,  perhaps,  an  echo  of  the  phrase  non  leviter  coniunctos  in  a  letter  of  Boniface 
to  the  Italian  reformer  Lelio  Sozzini,  written  toward  the  end  of  February  1550, 
thanking  him  for  confirming  the  news  of  Alciatus'  death?  Boniface  writes:  *Within 
the  last  two  years  I  have  lost  three  friends,  mihi  non  levi  notitia  coniunctos,  Car- 
dinal Sadoleto,  Claudius  Cantiuncula,  and  now  Alciatus"  (AK  3251). 

For  their  generous  assistance  in  the  compiling  of  the  chronicle,  I  want  to 
thank  three  friends  of  my  own:  Professor  William  S.  Heckscher,  Mrs.  Agnes 
Sherman  of  the  Princeton  University  Library,  and  Mrs.  Blanche  Cooney  of 
the  Smith  College  Library. 

Florence,  Massachussetts 


200  ANDREAS  ALCIATUS  AND  BONIFACE  AMERBACH 


Notes 


1.  Callahan,  Virginia  W.  "The  Erasmus-Alciati  Friendship,"  Acta  Conventus  Neo- 
Latini  Lovaniensis,  (1973):  133-41. 

2.  Allen,  P.  S.  "The  Correspondence  of  an  Early  Printing  House,"  Glasgow  University 
Publications,  (1932). 

3.  For  a  history  of  the  editing  o{  Die  Amerbachkorrespondenz  see  Hans  R.  Guggisberg, 
"The  Amerbach  Correspondence,"  Erasmus  in  English,  no.  3,  (1971):  25-28.  All  quo- 
tations taken  from  Die  Amerbach  Korrespondenz  are  cited  by  page  in  the  text  with  the  sym- 
bol AK. 

4.  The  painting  is  now  in  the  Oeffentliche  Kunstsammlung  Kunstmuseum  Basel. 

5.  Le  Lettere  di  Andrea  Alciato  Giuresconsulto ,  ed.  G.  L.  Barni,  no.  3  (Florence,  1953). 

6.  P.  S.  Allen,  Opus  Epistolarum  Des.  Erasmi  Roterodami,  no.  1250  (Oxford,  1906-1956). 

7.  Erasmus,  Adagia  (Leyden  ed.)  1.3.59,  1.5.45,  4.9.36,  1.7.34. 

8.  Erasmus,  Ciceronianus ,  Opera  Omnia,  1.2  (Amsterdam  1971,  ed.  Margolin). 

9.  Allen,  no.  2468. 

10.  Barni,  no.  24.  That  Barni  gave  the  wrong  date  for  this  letter  (December  9,  1522) 
is  clear  from  the  autograph  letter  in  the  Ducal  Library  in  Wolfenbiiettel. 

1 1 .  On  two  other  occasions  Alciatus  attributed  works  written  by  himself  to  his  friend 
the  jurisconsult  Aurelius  Albutius.  See  his  Defensio,  a  response  to  the  criticisms  of  Pe- 
trus  Stella,  published  by  Froben  in  1530,  and  the  Emblem  with  the  motto  Albutij  D. 
Alciatum,  suadentis,  ut  de  tumultibus  Italicis  se  subducat,  et  in  Gallia  profiteatur,  first  printed 
Augsburg  1531. 

12.  Pavia  1533-37;  Bologna  1537-40;  Pavia  1540-42;  Ferrara  1542-46;  Pavia 
1546-50. 

13.  Andreas  Alciatus,  De  Verborum  Significatione,  (Lyons,  1530)  1-2,  244. 


A  Bibliographical  Note: 

Although  I  have  chosen  to  reply  primarily  on  Die  Amerbachkorrespondenz ,  volumes  2-7 
(Basel,  1943-1973),  the  following  secondary  sources  are  noteworthy: 

"Andrea  Alciato  e  Bonifacio  Amerbach,"  by  Emilio  Costa,  Archivio  Storico  Italiano, 
volume  36  (1905),  pp.  100-135. 

Humanists  and  Jurists  by  Myron  P.  Gilmore,  Harvard  University  Press,  Cambridge, 
Mass.,  1963. 

Basle  and  France  in  the  Sixteenth  Century  by  Peter  G.  Bietenholz,  Librairie  Droz,  Gen- 
eva, 1971. 

Contemporaries  of  Erasmus,  ed.  Peter  G.  Bietenholz,  Toronto:  University  of  Toronto 
Press,  vol.  1,  1985. 


Neulateinische  Geschichtsschreibung 
im  hoUandischen  Humanismus  des  16.  Jahrhunderts 

Chris  L.  Heesakkers 

Im  Jahre  1566  konnte  Jean  Bodin  fiir  seine  Ubersicht  der  wichtigsten 
Geschichtswerke  vom  Altertum  bis  in  seine  eigene  Zeit,  im  abschliefienden 
Kapitel  seiner  Methodus  ad  facilem  historiarum  cognitionem,  nur  einen  ein- 
zigen  Titel  aus  den  nordlichen  Niederlanden  anfiihren,  die  1530  in  Strafi- 
burg  gedruckte  Historia  Batavica  des  Gerardus  Noviomagus  oder  Geldenhauer 
aus  Nijmegen.^  Wenn  diese  batavische  oder  hollandische  Geschichte,  die  de 
facto  nur  die  ersten  sechs  Seiten  des  Biichleins  Geldenhauers  einnimmt,  das 
erste  und  einzige  Erzeugnis  der  hoUandischen  Historiographie  ware,  dann 
ware  es  traurig  um  den  friihen  hoUandischen  Humanismus  bestellt!  Vielleicht 
aber  war  das.Werk  dem  Bodin  nur  bekannt,  weil  es  in  Strafiburg  erschienen 
war.  In  seinem  "The  Coming  of  Humanism  to  the  Low  Countries"  hat  Jozef 
IJsewijn  jedoch  darauf  hingewiesen,  dafi  schon  die  historischen  Werke  des  Mat- 
thaus  Herbenus  aus  Maastricht,  die  aus  dem  letzten  Viertel  des  15.  Jahrhun- 
derts stammen,  eine  deutUche  Hinwendung  zur  humanistischen  Historiographie 
zeigten.^  Herbenus  schrieb  seine  opuscula,  nachdem  er  ein  Jahrzehnt  in  Ita- 
lien  verbracht  und  das  Werk  des  Flavio  Biondo  ("cujus  sepulchrum  Romae 
vidimus")  kennengelernt  hatte.  Sein  Libellus  de  Traiecto  instaurato,  iiber  seine 
Geburtsstadt  Maastricht,  erinnert  schon  im  Titel  an  Biondo's  Roma  instaurata? 
Wenn  wir  die  Biographic  in  unsere  Uberlegungen  miteinbeziehen  und  uns 
nicht  beschranken  auf  solche  der  eigenen  Landsleute,  dann  hat  das  15.  Jahr- 
hundert  in  Holland  ein  interessantes  historiographisches  Spezimen  in  der  Vita 
Petrarcae  des  Rudolph  Agricola  hervorgebracht.*  Gerade  in  dieser  Gattung 
widmet  sich  auch  das  16.  Jahrhundert  erstmals  der  Geschichtsschreibung.  1516 
erscheint  die  Hieronymi  Stridonensis  vita  des  Erasmus  von  Rotterdam.^  Agricola 
wie  Erasmus  haben  sich  aufierdem  voriibergehend  mit  der  "Ars  historica" 
beschaftigt.^  Im  selben  Jahre  1516,  so  konnte  man  sagen,  hat  auch  die  hu- 
manistische  vaterlandische  Geschichtsschreibung  Hollands  angefangen,  dXs 
Cornelius  Aurelius  aus  Gouda  seine  Defensio  gloriae  Batavinae  verfafite.''  Aure- 
lius  verteidigt  darin  die  Identitat  des  antiken  Batavia  mit  der  spateren  Pro- 


202  NEULATEINISCHE  GESCHICHTSSCHREIBUNG 

vinz  oder  Grafschaft  Holland,  und  dies  gegen  die  Zweifel,  die  Geldenhauer 
geaufiert  hatte,  als  er  damals  in  Lowen  war.  Drei  Jahre  danach  erschien  in 
Antwerpen,  wo  auch  Aurelius'  Defensio  erschienen  war,  De  Hollandiae  princi- 
pibus  des  Adrianus  Barlandus,  Lehrer  am  Collegium  Trilingue  in  Lowen.  Ob- 
wohl  das  Biichlein  das  historische  Debiit  des  Autors  war,  wird  dieser  auf  der 
Titelseite  schon  "Historicus  facundissimus"  genannt  und  geehrt  als  der  Sueton 
der  mittelalterlichen  hollandischen  Grafen,  deren  militarische  "res  gestae"  und 
"virtutes"  er  bekannt  gemacht  hat.  Die  als  heroisch  gekennzeichnete  Geschichte 
der  Grafenzeit  wird,  neben  dem  antiken  Batavia,  der  zweite  Focus  der  hollan- 
dischen Geschichtsschreibung  des  Jahrhunderts  sein.  Auch  das  zweite  Gebiet 
der  nordlichen  Niederlande,  die  Diozese  Utrecht,  hat  in  Barlandus  einen  seiner 
friihesten  Historiker  gefunden.^ 

Mit  den  "Libelli"  dieser  Autoren,  die  alle  mehr  oder  weniger  vom  stilisti- 
schen  und  kritischen  Geist  des  Humanismus  angehaucht  waren,  war  der  Be- 
ginn  einer  humanistischen  niederlandischen  Geschichtsschreibung  gemacht 
worden.  Jetzt  wartete  man  auf  einen  gelehrten  Humanisten  von  Format,  der 
sich  der  Geschichte  seines  Vaterlands  widmen  soUte.  Ein  solcher  Gelehrter  war 
der  Rektor  einer  Lateinschule  zu  Naarden  und  spatere  Vergilkommentator 
Lambertus  Hortensius.  Hortensius  war  als  Priester  des  Bistums  Utrecht  be- 
sonders  an  der  kirchlichen  Geschichte  interessiert.  So  hat  er  ein  Werk  iiber 
die  Bewegung  der  Wiedertaufer,  Tumultus  Anabaptistarum,  geschrieben,  das 
einem  Amsterdamer  Kollegen,  dem  Rektor  Johannes  Nivenius,  im  Jahre  1552 
den  Stoff  zu  einem  kleinen  dramatischen  Epos  geboten  hat.^  Kirchliche  Ge- 
schichte war  aber  in  Utrecht  zugleich  Landesgeschichte  und  daher  sind  die 
Secessionum  civilium  Ultraiectinarum  libri  VII  des  Hortensius  aus  dem  Jahre  1546 
das  erste  humanistische  Geschichtswerk  Utrechts  von  grofier  Allure  geworden. 
Hortensius  ist  sich  bewufit,  der  erste  Autor  einer  zeitgenossischen  Geschichte 
Utrechts  zu  sein:  "nemo  hactenus  extitit  qui  de  iis  [sc.  Ultrajectinorum  rebus] 
separatim  librum  scripsit."^^  Die  Praefatio  des  Werkes  ist  noch  wenig  pro- 
grammatisch.  Im  Werk  selbst  beweist  Hortensius  jedoch,  dafi  er  mit  den  Prin- 
zipien  der  humanistischen  Historiographie  vollkommen  vertraut  ist.  Wenn  er 
ein  Dokument  in  die  lateinische  Sprache  iibersetzt,  dann  macht  er  das  nicht 
"totidem,  quot  in  Germanorum  lingua  vocibus,"  denn  das  wiirde  lacherlich 
und  langweilig  sein,  sondern  "quantum  Latina  puritas,  exclusa  nausea  pro  no- 
stra facultate  feret"  (S.  172).  Der  eigentlichen  Geschichte  geht  eine  Darlegung 
"de  urbis  ipsius  origine,  de  situ,  de  populi  moribus,  religionis  initiis,  varia  de- 
nique  populi  fortuna"  (S.  1)  voran,  Themen  die  an  Tacitus'  Germania  und  mehr 
noch  an  Aeneas  Silvius'  Descriptio  de  ritu,  situ,  moribus  et  conditione  Germaniae  erin- 
nern.  Bei  der  Charakteristik  einer  der  Schliisselfiguren  des  Konfliktes,  lohannes 
Mindenus,  denkt  man  leicht  an  Sallustius,yu^Mr/Aa  7  ff.  (S.  26).  Dieser  Skizze 
geht  eine  lange  "Oratio"  des  Mindenus  voran,  die  seine  aufierordentliche  Elo- 
quenz  illustrieren  soil:  "Caeterum  quoniam  de  ejus  eloquentia  memini,  libet 
hie  orationem  adscribere,  quam  eo  die  ad  populum  .  .  .  habuit"  (S.  26).  Auch 


CHRIS  L.    HEESAKKERS  203 

an  anderen  Personen  des  Kriegsdramas  wird  Hortensius  seine  rhetorischen  Ta- 
lente  zeigen,  wobei  die  paarweise  komponierten  Orationes  nicht  fehlen  werden. 
Diese  rhetorischen  Erzeugnisse  sind  einer  der  Beweise,  dafi  die  humanistische 
Geschichtsschreibung  in  der  Mitte  des  16.  Jahrhunderts  in  den  nordUchen  Nie- 
derlanden  mit  dem  Werke  des  Hortensius  ein  reifes  Niveau  erreicht  hat. 

Die  Entwicklung  der  Geschichtsschreibung  des  eigentUchen  Holland,  Ba- 
tavia,  seit  Barlandus  ist  interessanter  als  die  Fortsetzung  seiner  Utrechter  Res 
gestae.  Es  wurde  schon  erwahnt,  dafi  die  wenigen  Seiten  des  Werkchens  Gel- 
denhauers,  ein  Jahrzehnt  nach  dem  des  Barlandus  ediert,  sogar  dem  Fran- 
zosen  Bodin  bekannt  waren.  Nach  Geldenhauers  Historia  Batavica  ist  es  lange 
still  geblieben.  Als  aber  im  Jahre  1559  der  neue  Landesherr  der  Niederlande, 
Philipp  II,  endgiiltig  nach  Spanien  abgereist  war,  drohte  die  Gefahr,  dafi  das 
Land  mehr  und  mehr  zu  einer  Provinz  des  Spanischen  Reichs  degradiert 
wiirde.  Demgegeniiber  erwachten  anscheinend  erneute  nationale  Gefiihle, 
die  die  provinziale  Behorde  Hollands,  die  Staaten  oder  "Ordines  HoUandiae 
Westfrisiaeque,"  dazu  brachten,  sich  nach  einem  eigenen  "nationalen"  Hi- 
storiographen  umzusehen.  1565  fand  man  einen  solchen  in  dem  grofiten  Ge- 
lehrten  auf  eigenem  Boden,  Hadrianus  Junius  aus  Hoorn  im  damaligen 
West-Friesland.  Junius  hatte  schon  eine  Reihe  meist  philologischer  Werke  pub- 
liziert  und  manche  andere,  wie  die  Emblemata  und  der  Nomenclator  octilinguis, 
waren  im  Entstehen.  Obwohl  Junius  fortfuhr,  sich  mit  der  Philologie  zu 
beschaftigen,  hat  er  sich  auch  bald  an  seine  neuen  Verpflichtungen  gesetzt. 
Wahrscheinlich  war  seine  Batavia,  wie  das  Werk  spater  heifien  wird,  im  grofien 
ganzen  im  Jahre  1570  abgeschlossen.  Die  Staaten  jedoch,  die  inzwischen  an 
der  Seite  des  Prinzen  von  Oranien  in  das,  was  die  hoUandische  Geschichts- 
schreibung spater  den  achtzigjahrigen  Krieg  gegen  Spanien  nennen  wird,  ver- 
wickelt  worden  waren,  und  die  bis  zu  diesem  Zeitpunkt  militarisch  nicht  sehr 
gliicklich  gewesen  waren,  hielten  die  Veroffentlichung  einer  Schrift  mit  einem 
so  evident  nationalistischen  Zweck  wahrscheinlich  nicht  fiir  opportun.  Be- 
stimmte  Stellen  in  der  Batavia  weisen  darauf  hin,  dafi  Junius  in  den  folgenden 
Jahren  an  dem  Buch  weitergearbeitet  hat.'^  Die  Widmung  an  die  Staaten  ist 
datiert:  2.  Januar  1575.*^  Am  nachsten  Tag  beschlossen  die  Staaten,  auf 
einen  Vorschlag  des  Prinzen  von  Oranien  hin,  Holland  mit  einer  eigenen  Uni- 
versitat  zu  versehen.  Sie  beauftragten  drei  Mitglieder,  unter  ihnen  den  jun- 
gen  Freund  des  Junius,  Janus  Dousa,  mit  der  Vorbereitung.  Zweifelsohne 
verdankte  Junius  das  Angebot  einer  Stelle  als  Professor  Medicinae  an  der  neuen, 
schon  am  8.  Februar  eroffneten  Universitat  unter  anderen  Dousa,  der  sich 
besonders  mit  der  Werbung  kompetenter  Professoren  beschaftigte.  Junius  starb 
jedoch  im  Juni  1575,  noch  bevor  er  mit  seinem  Unterricht  hatte  beginnen 
konnen.  Das  Manuskript  der  Batavia  blieb  in  der  Familie  des  Junius  und  war 
sogar  einige  Zeit  verschollen,  bis  Dousa,  der  sich  inzwischen  selbst  auch  immer 
mehr  fur  die  Geschichtsschreibung  Hollands  zu  interessieren  begonnen  hatte 
und  der  1584  die  Neuausgabe  der  Libelli  des  Barlandus  veranlafit  hatte,  sich 


204  NEULATEINISCHE  GESCHICHTSSCHREIBUNG 

seiner  annahm.  Im  Jahre  1588  wurde  das  Werk,  nachdem  es  von  Lipsius  und 
Dousa  "visitiert"  worden  war,  in  Leiden  herausgegeben.^^ 

Das  Vorhaben  des  Junius  war,  wie  er  in  der  Widmung  schrieb,  eine  "per- 
petua  rerum  per  principes  nostros  gestarum  narratio"  (S.  *4v).  Die  Batavia  ist 
davon  nur  der  erste,  vorbereitende  Band  nach  dem  Beispiel  der  Germania  des 
Tacitus,  die  ja  auch  nur  eine  Vorarbiet  zur  Geschichte  der  "Germaniae  bella" 
sei  (S.  **lr).  In  der  Batavia  soil  dasjenige  behandelt  werden,  das  dem  "histo- 
ricus  stylus"  einer  "perpetua  narratio"  schaden  und  die  "orationis  tela,"  die  "con- 
nexio  dictionis"  seines  eigentlichen  Geschichtswerkes  zerreifeen  wiirde  (S.  *4v). 
Die  Batavia  ist  demnach  fast  wie  eine  Sammlung  von  Exkursen.  Das  Buch  ent- 
halt,  nach  der  Widmung  und  einem  zweiten  Schreiben  an  die  Staaten  {De  hi- 
storiae  utilitate ac  necessitate,  fast  eine  knappe  "ars  historica,"  (S.  *  *2r-4r),  23  Kapitel 
verschiedener  Lange  und  Wichtigkeit  (iber  vielerlei  Themen,  teils  historisch 
und  kulturhistorisch  und  teils  geographisch  und  topographisch.  Es  ist  den 
Hollandern  seit  den  Zweifeln  Geldenhauers  viel  daran  gelegen,  die  alten  Ba- 
taver  als  ihre  legitimen  Ahnen  betrachten  und  ihre  eigene  Geschichte  bis  in 
das  Altertum  zuriickfuhren  zu  konnen.  Es  ist  vielleicht  kein  Zufall,  dafi  die 
ersten  zwolf  Kapitel  alle  das  Wort  "Batavia"  oder  "Batavi"  im  Titel  enthalten, 
wahrend  die  letzten  nur  einmal  das  Adjektiv  "Batavicus,"  dagegen  siebenmal 
den  Terminus  "HoUandia"  benutzen.  Unter  den  ''Batavia"-Kapiteln  fmdet  man 
sehr  kurz  behandelte  und  fast  triviale  Themen  wie  im  drei  Seiten  (S.  43-45) 
zahlenden  VI.  Kapitel  "Batavos  arte  natandi  excelluisse  &  equitatu,"  oder  im 
nur  eine  Seite  (S.  46)  umfassenden  VII.  Kapitel  "Batavos  cur  auricomos  Poe- 
tae  vocent,  &  de  Batavo  smegmate."  Das  zwolfte  und  letzte  Kapitel  dieser  Reihe 
ist  vor  allem  stilistisch  interessant.  Es  handelt  "De  CI.  Civili  regia  Batavorum 
stirpe  nato."^*  Die  ersten  drei  Seiten  des  Kapitels  schliefit  Junius  wie  folgt  ab: 
"Haec  fere  de  viri  conditione,  ingenio,  &  familia  comperi."  Dann  fahrt  er  fort: 
"nunc  reliqua  viri  praeclara  bello  facinora  detexere  aggrediar,  vestigijs  inhae- 
surus  Taciti"  (S.  140).  Was  folgt,  ist  tatsachlich,  als  einziges  Stiick  der  Ba- 
tavia, geschrieben  als  eine  "perpetua  historiae  narratio."  Das  Stiick  ist  eine 
ausgedehnte  Paraphrase  von  Historiae  4,  13-37  und  54-56.  Junius,  der  in  der 
Widmung  ankiindigt,  der  "brevitas"  des  Sueton  zu  folgen,  hat  diese,  wie  es 
scheint,  durch  die  Taciteische  "brevitas"  ersetzt.  Die  bezeichnendste  Ande- 
rung  ist  die  Umarbeitung  des  siebzehnten  Kapitels  des  Tacitus,  das  den  In- 
halt  der  aufriihrerischen  "secreti  sermones"  des  Civilis  resumiert.  Bei  Junius 
wird  dies  eine  schone,  lainge  "Oratio  directa."  Es  ist  das  einzige  Mai,  dafi  Ju- 
nius eine  derartige  explizite  Konzession  an  den  "orationis  nitor"  macht,  den 
er  im  Vorwort  De  historiae  utilitate  kritisierte  (S.  **3r). 

Die  Hollandia-Kapitel  sind  vor  allem  von  geographischer,  topographischer 
und  kulturhistorischer  Art.  Sie  fangen  an  mit  einer  Auseinandersetzung  iiber 
das  Verhaltnis  von  Historia,  Poesis  und  Fabula  untereinander  und  iiber  den 
Nutzen,  den  der  Historiker  aus  den  Fabeln  ziehen  kann  (S.  167-70).  Dieser 
Beginn  suggeriert  aufs  neue,  dafi  hier  ein  zweiter  Teil  hatte  anfangen  konnen. 


CHRIS  L.   HEESAKKERS  205 

Es  ist  aber  kein  neues  Vorwort,  sondern  ein  Teil  des  XIII.  Kapitels,  das  ab- 
geschlossen  wird  mit  einer  Neuausgabe  des  damals  popularen,  erstmals  von 
Martinus  Dorpius  1514  edierten  Reisebriefs  des  Chrysostomus  Neapolitanus 
De  situ  Hollandiae  vivendique  Hollandorum  institutis.  Die  nachsten  Kapitel  ahneln 
den  geographischen  (XIIII),  wirtschaftlichen  (XV)  und  literar-  und  kultur- 
historischen  (XVI)  Abschnitten  einer  Art  "Laus  Hollandiae,"  wie  man  auf 
Hinweis  des  Autors  diesen  Teil  am  besten  charakterisieren  konnte.  Denn,  so 
begriindet  der  Historiker  dieses  XVI.  Kapitel,  das  handelt  "De  Hollandiae 
ingenijs,  studijs  &  moribus,"  und  worin  die  neulateinischen  Poeten  eine  be- 
sondere  Stelle  einnehmen,  "quid  absoni  facturus  sim,  si  (patriam)  non  modo 
debita  laude  non  fraudem,  sed  gratiam  insuper  referam"  (S.  194).  Das  einzige 
Detail  dieses  Abschnitts,  worauf  ich  hier  aufmerksam  machen  mochte,  ist  das 
etwas  exaltierte  Elogium  auf  den  jiingsten  der  genannten  Neulateiner,  der  als 
ebenbiirtig  mit  dem  beispiellosen  Lyriker  Janus  Secundus  vorgestellt  wird, 
Janus  Dousa  (S.  236;  vgl.  307).  Junius  hatte  1568  dem  damals  zweiundzwan- 
zigjahrigen  Dousa  seine  Martialedition  gewidmet  und  stand  mit  ihm  in  regem 
Briefwechsel.  Im  Jahre  1569  erschien  der  von  Junius  gelobte  "exiguus  libellus" 
mit  den  Epigrammen,  Satiren,  Elegien  und  Silvae  Dousas.  Dessen  zweite  Samm- 
lung  von  Gedichten  sollte  auch  die  letzte  von  Junius  geschriebene  Poesie  ent- 
halten.  Dieses  Gemeinschaftswerk  der  beiden  Humanisten  erschien 
wahrscheinlich  im  April  1575,  das  heifit,  zwei  Monate  nach  der  Griindung 
der  Leidener  Universitat  und  zwei  Monate  vor  Junius'  Tod,  mit  dem  kuri- 
osen  Impressum  "In  nova  academia  nostra  Lugdunensi  excusum."  Das  Buch 
war  also  eine  Art  Visitenkarte  der  neuen  Akademie.^^ 

Das  folgende  und  langste  XVII.  Kapitel  der  Batavia  ist  eine  Topographie 
der  Stadte  Hollands.  Der  Abschnitt  iiber  Haarlem  ist  besonders  wichtig,  well 
hier  zum  ersten  Male  fur  Holland  und  zwar  fiir  Haarlem  die  Erfmdung  der 
Buchdruckkunst  eingefordert  wird  (S.  253-58).  Junius  zweifelt  zwar  an  dem 
Erfolg  seines  Pladoyers  fur  den  Primeur  des  Laurens  Janszoon  Costers,  hat 
aber  mit  seiner  Behauptung  trotzdem  eine  langwierige  Kontroverse  veranlafit, 
wie  z.B,  die  von  Ulrich  Bornemann  gesammelten  deutschen  Testimonia  aus 
dem  17.  Jahrhundert  deutlich  illustrieren.^^ 

Obwohl  zu  den  sieben  iibrigen  Kapiteln  noch  vieles  zu  sagen  ware,  miissen 
sie  hier  aufier  Betracht  bleiben.  Im  ganzen  ist  die  Batavia  ein  buntes,  aber  wich- 
tiges,  historisch  und  philologisch  reichhaltiges,  und  trotz  seiner  aufierordent- 
lichen  Gelehrsamkeit  im  allgemeinen  unterhaltendes  Buch.  Der  Autor  tritt  uns 
aus  dem  Werk  entgegen  als  ein  freundlicher  Erzahler,  der  nur  wenig  pole- 
misiert^^  und  der  von  einer  grofien  Liebe  zu  seinem  Gegenstand  getrieben 
wird,  sich  aber  dennoch  nicht  zu  einem  unverantworteten  und  unaufrichtigen 
Chauvinismus  verfiihren  lafit.  Ob  er  sein  niichternes  Verfahren  in  dem  ge- 
planten,  oiitnhdiT  Annales  zu  nennenden  zweiten  Band,  der  die  von  der  mittel- 
alterlichen  Geschichtsschreibung  vernachlassigten  "rerum  gestarum  moles  ac 
magnitudo,  Principum  claritudo,  maiorum  virtus,  exemplorum  numerus" 


206  NEULATEINISCHE  GESCHICHTSSCHREIBUNG 

behandeln  sollte  (S.  **2r-v),  mit  Erfolg  durchzufuhren  imstande  gewesen 
ware,  werden  wir  nie  erfahren.  Wie  wir  gesehen  haben,  blieb  der  erste  Teil, 
die  Baiavia,  auch  nach  dem  Tode  des  Junius  im  Jahre  1575  vorlaufig  unge- 
druckt  und  der  zweite,  die  Annales,  wurde  nicht  einmal  geschrieben. 

Jedoch,  ohne  sich  dessen  bewufit  zu  sein,  hatte  Junius  einen  Anteil  an  der 
Heranbildung  eines  Nachfolgers.  Denn  es  wird  kein  Zufall  sein,  dafi  sein  schon 
genannter  Dichterfreund  Dousa  sich  gerade  in  den  siebziger  Jahren  an  die  In- 
ventarisation  der  Archive  der  hollandischen  Grafschaft  setzt.  Zu  Anfang  der 
achtziger  Jahre  sehen  wir  ihn  intensiv  mit  der  Sammlung  des  Materials  fiir 
eine  hollandische  Geschichte  beschaftigt.  1585  erhielten  seine  historiographi- 
schen  Bemiihungen  eine  formale  Anerkennung.  Am  1 .  Marz  dieses  Jahres 
wurde  Dousa  zum  ersten  Bibliothekar  der  Leidener  Universitat  ernannt.  Ob- 
wohl  die  Biicher  noch  fast  ganzlich  fehlten,  wurde  dem  neuen  Amt  eine 
betrachtliche  Besoldung  von  300  Gulden  pro  Jahr  gewahrt.  Die  Curatores 
verbanden  damit  jedoch  den  besonderen  Auftrag,  "zu  beschreiben  die  Histo- 
ric und  die  Sachen  Hollands  in  der  lateinischen  Sprache  und  in  Prosa,  so  wie 
vormals  die  Staaten  von  Holland  den  verstorbenen  doctor  Adrianus  Junius 
dazu  mit  einem  bestimmten  jahrlichen  Gehalt  beauftragt  hatten."^^  Bei  die- 
sem  doppelten  Dienstauftrag  diirfen  wir  nicht  vergessen,  dafi  der  neu  Ange- 
stellte  selbst  zugleich  der  fiihrende  Curator  war:  Dousa  hat  sich  selbst  zum 
Historiographen  Hollands  ernannt.  Die  Vorbereitungen  fiir  seine  Arbeit  waren 
wahrscheinlich  schon  in  einem  fortgeschrittenen  Stadium,  denn  sonst  hatte 
er  dem  Auftrag  nicht  hinzufiigen  lassen,  dafi  er  "innerhalb  eines  Jahres  eine 
Probe  vorlegen  wiirde,  um  dieselbe  anschliefiend  zu  edieren  und  bekanntzu- 
geben  gemafi  dem  Belieben  derselben  Staaten. "^^  Ob  diese  Probe  tatsachlich 
je  vorgelegt  wurde,  wissen  wir  nicht.  In  den  nachsten  Jahren  publiziert  Dousa 
einiges,  aber  keine  hollandische  Geschichte.  Er  ist  an  der  Ausgabe  von  Ju- 
nius' Batavia  beteiligt  (1588)  und  an  einer  Ausgabe  einer  mittelalterlichen  nie- 
derlandischen  Chronik  (1591).^^  Die  Verlegenheit  gegeniiber  den  Staaten, 
denen  Dousa  selbst  als  Mitglied  angehorte,  wurde  so  grofi,  dafi  er  1593  eine 
Epistola  apologetica  publizierte,  um  die  Verzogerung  zu  rechtfertigen.^^  1599 
endlich  erscheint  ein  Werk  Annales,  das  die  Staaten  iiberrascht  haben  wird. 
Es  behandelt  zwar  eine  Frist  von  etwa  dreieinhalb  Jahrhunderten  aus  der 
hollandischen  Grafenzeit,  ist  jedoch  der  Form  nach  kein  ordentliches  geschicht- 
liches  Werk,  sondern  eine  elegische  Dichtung  in  zehn  Biichern.  Was  hat  Dousa 
zu  dieser  ungewohnlichen  Form  des  Werkes  gebracht?  Und  waren  dies  die 
Annales,  die  Junius  nicht  mehr  hatte  schreiben  konnen?  Dafi  Dousa  mit  seiner 
Dichtung  die  von  Junius  bemerkte  Liicke  in  der  mittelalterlichen  Geschichts- 
schreibung  ausfullen  wollte,  wird  klar  aus  seiner  gleichlautenden  Feststellung, 
auch  hier  in  der  Widmung  an  die  Staaten,  dafi  die  Leistungen  der  Grafen  "vix 
unius  interdum  pagellae  spatio  comprehensas"  seien,  obwohl  man,  so  fiigt 
Dousa  hinzu,  zu  einer  passenden  Beschreibung  mindestens  zehn  Iliaden 
brauchte  (S.  **lr).  Also,  was  Holland  eigentlich  fehlt,  ist  ein  Homer,  ein  Epos. 


CHRIS  L.   HEESAKKERS  207 

Es  gibt  tatsachlich  mehrere  Indizien,  dafi  Dousa  an  eine  epische  Dichtung  ge- 
dacht  und  sogar  damit  angefangen  hat.^^  Selbsterkenntnis  hat  ihn  jedoch 
davon  abgehalten,  sich  an  der  "grandiloqua  heroicae  Poeseos  sublimitas"  zu 
iibernehmen,  und  er  hat  es  vorgezogen,  die  Fasti  des  Ovid  zum  Muster  zu 
nehmen  und  sich  des  elegischen  Distichons  zu  bedienen  (S.  **ijv-**iijr),  zumal 
dieses  nicht  griechischen,  sondern  bibUschen  Ursprungs  und  folglich  von  be- 
sonderer  Wiirdigkeit  sei,  wie  Dousa  in  einem  zweiten  WorwoTtAdeosdem,  d.h. 
an  die  Staaten,  De  poeticae  artis  cum  Historia  Communione  &  Societaie — auch  hier 
folgt  er  dem  Beispiel  des  Junius  —  behauptet  (S.  ***lr). 

Bei  seinem  1585  gegebenen  Versprechen,  eine  Geschichte  in  Prosa  zu 
schreiben,  hat  Dousa  wahrscheinhch  auf  die  Assistenz  seines  vierzehnjahri- 
gen  Sohns  Janus  vertraut,  der  damails  schon  die  batavischen  Ausschnitte  aus 
den  antiken  Autoren  zu  sammeln  und  niederlandische  Dokumente  ins  Latei- 
nische  zu  iibersetzen  angefangen  hatte.  Der  Anteil  dieses  leider  schon  1596 
gestorbenen  Dousa  Filius  wird  klar,  wenn  zwei  Jahre  nach  den  metrischen  An- 
nalen,  im  Jahre  1601,  die  Bataviae  Hollandiaeque  Annales  erscheinen.  Sie  sind, 
wie  die  Titelseite  aufweist,  "a  lano  Dousa  Filio  concepti  atque  inchoati  iam 
olim."  Das  Werk  enthalt  eine  Praefatio  und  einen  Liber  singularis  cui  Titulus 
Batavia  des  Sohnes,  der  auch  die  letzten  zweieinhalb  Biicher  des  zweiten  Teils, 
die  Hollandiae  Annales  in  zehn  Biichern,  verfafit  hat.  Dieses  Stuck  umfafit  fast 
genau  die  Periode,  die  die  Stoffe  lieferte  fiir  die  metrischen  Annaden  des  Va- 
ters,  die  Zeit  der  hollandischen  Grafen  vom  neunten  bis  zum  dreizehnten  Jahr- 
hundert.  Der  Tod  seines  Sohnes  war  fiir  Dousa  der  Anlafi,  auch  die 
Prosageschichte  (wieder?)  auf  sich  zu  nehmen  und  die  Jahrhunderte  zwischen 
Batavia  und  der  Grafenzeit  in  achteinhalb  Biichern  zu  beschreiben.  Der  Vor- 
zug  dieses  traurigen  Umstandes  war,  dafi  Dousa,  der  seine  stilistischen  und 
poetischen  Talente  in  seinem  Gedicht  geniigend  unter  Beweis  gestellt  hatte, 
sich  jetzt  volhg  auf  den  historischen  Inhalt  seines  Werkes,  oder,  wie  ein  Kri- 
tiker  es  formuliert  hat,  auf  die  Geschichtsforschung  statt  auf  die  elegante  Ge- 
schichtsschreibung  konzentrieren  konnte.^^  Die  mehr  als  sieben  Biicher  des 
Vaters  unterscheiden  sich  stilistisch  von  denen  des  Sohns  wie  von  den  friiheren 
Geschichtswerken  schon  darin,  dafi  sie  bis  auf  eine  Ausnahme  keine  "orationes" 
enthalten  (S.  317-19;  vgl.  auch  142-43).  Der  wichtigste  Beweis  einer  neuen 
Haltung  gegeniiber  der  Geschichtsschreibung  liegt  aber  in  dem  absoluten  Pri- 
mat,  der  den  geschriebenen,  wo  moglich  contemporaren  Quellen  und  archi- 
valischen  Dokumenten  gegeben  wird.  Einige  mittelalterliche  Urkunden  erleben 
hier  ihre  "editio  princeps."  Der  Einwand,  dafi  das  andersartige  Latein  den  "sty- 
lus historicus"  der  "narratio  perpetua"  beeintrachtigen  wiirde,  darf  kein  Grund 
sein,  sie  wegzulassen  oder  stilistisch  zu  andern.  Einmal  wird  ein  solches  Do- 
kument  zwar  im  Text  paraphrasiert,  aber  dann  wird  es  in  margine  buchstab- 
lich  mitaufgenommen  (S.  226).  Das  ganze  Werk  hindurch  sind  auf  dem  Rand 
die  benutzten  Quellen,  sehr  oft  mit  ausfiihrlichen  buchstablichen  Zitaten,  ge- 
geben. Diese  und  andere  Merkmale  des  Werkes  Dousas  brachten  den  schon 


208  NEULATEINISCHE  GESCHICHTSSCHREIBUNG 

genannten  Kritiker,  Herman  Kampinga,  zu  der  Folgerung,  dafi  diese  Annates 
sich  so  sehr  unterschieden  von  allem,  was  bis  dahin  in  Holland  geleistet  war, 
dafi  man  sie  ruhig  als  den  Anfang  einer  neuen  Periode  der  hollandischen  Histo- 
riographie  betrachten  kann.^*  Dousas  Annalen  in  Prosa  sind  ein  wiirdiger 
Beginn  des  neuen,  hier  nicht  mehr  zu  behandelnden  17.  Jahrhunderts. 


Anmerkungen 


1.  Methodus,  2.  Aufl.,  s.l.  1595,  342. 

2.  Itinerarium  Italicum.  The  Profile  of  the  Italian  Renaissance  in  the  Mirror  of  its  European 
Transformations,  ed.  by  H.  A.  Oberman  with  T.  A.  Brady,  Jr.,  Leiden  1975  (S.  193-301), 
255. 

3.  Matthaus  Herbenus,  Over  hersteld  Maastricht  (De  Trajecto  instaurato),  vertaald  .  .  . 
door  M.  G.  M.  A.  van  Heyst,  Roermond  1985;  vgl.  S.  8,  Prologus:  "Quomodo  deinde 
restaurata  sit  (sc.  Roma),  Blondus  canonicus  Lateranensis,  cujus  sepulchrum  Romae 
vidimus,  persequitur." 

4.  Ausgabe  von  L.  Bertalot,  "Rudolf  Agricolas  Lobrede  auf  Petrarca"  in:  Studien  zum 
italienischen  und  deutschen  Humanismus,  Rome  1975,  II,  1-29.  Dazu  Th.  E.  Mommsen 
"Rudolph  Agricola's  Life  of  Petrarca,"  in:  Medieval  and  Renaissance  Studies ,  Ithaca  1959, 
236-61. 

5.  Erasmi  opuscula,  ed.  W.  K.  Ferguson,  's-Gravenhage  1933,  125-90. 

6.  Vgl,  Agricola,  De  inventione  dialectica,  Koln  1539  (reprint  Nieuwkoop  1967),  L. 
Ill,  c.  IX:  "Quis  poetis  ordo,  quis  historiae,  quis  tradendis  artibus  conveniat";  Eras- 
mus, Epist.  45. 

7.  Fiir  den  Titel,  s.  H.  Kampinga,  Opvattingen  over  onze  oudere  Vaderlandsche  Geschie- 
denis  bij  de  Hollandsche  historici  der  XVIe  en  XVIIe  eeuw,  's-Gravenhage  1917,  S.  XV. 

8.  E.  Daxhelet,  Adrien  Barlandus  humaniste  beige,  Louvain  1938,  98  und  102. 

9.  S.  Carmina  Scholastica  Amstelodamensia,  ed.  C.  L.  Heesakkers  and  W.  G.  Kamer- 
beek,  Leiden  1984,  25-51. 

10.  In  der  von  mir  gebrauchten  Ausgabe,  Utrecht  1642,  S.l.  Die  Erstausgabe  des 
Werkes  von  1546  war  in  Basel  erschienen. 

11.  Von  Junius  in  der  Batavia  erwahnte  Ereignisse  aus  den  Jahren  1571-1575  z.B. 
30,  259  (Belagerung  Haarlem,  1573),  271  (Belagerung  Leiden,  1574),  283  (Belagerung 
Haarlem  und  Alkmaar  1573),  290  (Pliinderung  Naarden,  1572). 

12.  Vgl.  jedoch  B.  A.  Vermaseren,  "Het  ontstaan  van  Hadrianus  Junius'  Batavia," 
in:  Huldeboek  pater  Dr  Bonaventura  Kruitwagen  o.f.m.,  's-Gravenhage  1949,  407-26. 

13.  Das  "visitieren"  des  Lipsius  und  Dousa  in:  Leiden,  Stadtarchiv,  Burgemeesters 
Dagboek,  4.Januar  1588. 

14.  Vgl.  Tacitus,  Hist.  4,  13:  "lulius  Civilis  et  Claudius  Paulus  regia  stirpe  multo 
ceteros  anteibant." 

15.  lani  Duzae  Nordovicis  Nova  Poemata  .  .  .  Item  Hadriani  lunij  Carminum  Lugdunensium 
Sylva.  In  Nova  Academia  nostra  Lugdunensi  excusum.  Anno  1575.  Impensis  loannis 
Hauteni. 

16.  Ulrich  Bomemann,  Anlehnung  und  Abgrenzung.  Untersuchungen  zur  Rezeption  der  nie- 
derldndischen  Literatur  in  der  deutschen  Dichtungsreform  des  siebzehnten  Jahrhunderts,  Assen- 
Amsterdam  1976,  35  ff. 


CHRIS  L.    HEESAKKERS  209 


1 7 .  In  den  letzten  Kapiteln  werden  allerdings  dann  und  wann  Autoren  wegen  ihrer 
"ineptiae"  getadelt. 

18.  P.  C.  Molhuysen,  Bronnen  tot  de geschiedenis  der  Leidsche  Universiteit,  I,  's-Gravenhage 
1913,  123*. 

19.  Molhuysen,  ibid. 

20.  Hollantsche  Riim-Kroniik.  .  .  .  Met  een  Voorrede  des  Edelen  E.  Jonkh.  Jan  vander  Does 
/Here  tot  Noordtwyck  /  Registermeester  van  Hollandt.  .  .,  Amsterdam  1591. 

21.  lani  Dousae  Epistolae  apologeticae ,  Leiden  1593. 

22.  S.  mein  Artikel  "Rhetorische  marginalia  in  de  metrische  Annales  van  Janus  Dousa 
Pater  (1599),"  in:  De  zeventiende  eeuw  1,  1985,  37-47. 

23.  Kampinga,  o.c.  (Anm.  7),  25. 

24.  Kampinga,  ibid. 


Die  Stellung  der  neulateinischen  Studien  im 
philologisch-historischen  Wissenschaftssystem 

Johannes  Irmscher 

Unser  Sakulum  ist  in  alien  Lebensbereichen  durch  Organisation  be- 
stimmt,  und  auch  die  Wissenschaft,  gleich  welcher  Sparte  und 
Couleur,  vermag  sich  dieser  Tendenz  nicht  zu  entziehen.  Konnte 
ein  Ironiker  vor  noch  gar  nicht  allzulanger  Zeit  manchen  Vertretern  der  Ge- 
schichtswissenschaft  vorhalten,  sie  verfuhren  nach  dem  Prinzip  "Quod  non 
est  in  actis,  non  est  in  mundo,"  so  diirfte  fiir  unsere  Tage  gelten,  dafi  wissen- 
schaftsleitende  Organe  sehr  oft  ein  Fachgebiet  erst  dann  als  solches  anerken- 
nen,  wenn  es  iiber  eine  internationale  Organisation  verfiigt  mit  Prasidenten 
und  Conseil,  wie  sich  versteht,  mit  Kongressen,  Resolutionen  und  offentlichen 
Manifestationen.  Die  geschilderte  Tendenz  hat  in  den  Jahrzehnten  nach  dem 
Zweiten  Weltkrieg  dazu  gefiihrt,  dafi  sich  nahezu  alle  Fachgebiete  weltweit 
zusammenschlossen  und  dabei,  zumeist  im  Mafistab  der  UNESCO,  geradezu 
Hierarchien  herausbildeten.  Auch  die  neulateinischen  Studien  haben  sich, 
wenngleich  in  mancher  Beziehung  nur  als  Randsiedler,  in  jene  Entwicklun- 
gen  integriert. 

Es  lafit  sich  dariiber  streiten,  ob  die  angesprochenen  Tendenzen  lediglich 
durch  aufiere  Erfordernisse  bestimmt  sind,  beispielsweise  den  Drang  zur  Bii- 
rokratisierung  des  gesamten  offentlichen  Lebens,  wie  er  iiber  differente  Ge- 
sellschaftsordnungen  hinweg  allenthalben  in  der  Welt  spiirbar  ist,  oder  ob  sie 
aus  der  immanenten  Gesetzlichkeit  moderner  Wissenschaftsentwicklung  er- 
wachsen.  Der  Streit  dariiber  braucht  hier  nicht  gefiihrt  zu  werden;  unbestreit- 
bar  ist  dagegen,  dafi  sich  jene  Tendenz  zur  Organisation  mit  einer  Tendenz 
zur  Systematik  verbindet,  die  unzweifelhaft  innerwissenschaftlichen  Erforder- 
nissen  gerecht  wird  und  nicht  lediglich  praktizistischen  Erwagungen  entspricht. 
Die  Science  of  science,  die  Wissenschaftstheorie,  hat  zwar  ihren  Ausgang  von 
naturwissenschaftlichen  Erfordernissen  genommen,  ihre  paradigmatische  Be- 
deutung  auch  fiir  die  philologisch-historischen  Disziplinen  steht  jedoch  aufier 
Zweifel. 

Zu  einer  Systembildung  ist  zuerst,  soweit  ich  sehe,  die  griechisch-romische 


212  DIE  STELLUNG  DER  NEULATEINISCHEN  STUDIEN 

Altertumswissenschaft  gelangt;  die  Griinde  fiir  diesen  Vorlauf  sind  verstand- 
lich.  Die  klassischen  Studien  hatten  sich  bereits  in  Renaissance  und  Huma- 
nismus  als  moderne  biirgerliche  Wissenschaft  konstituiert  und  verfugten  somit 
neben  der  Theologie  iiber  die  langste  Uberlieferung.  Bis  zur  industriellen 
Revolution  im  Ausgang  des  18.  und  Beginn  des  19.  Jahrhunderts  lieferten  sie 
iiberdies  die  Grundlagen  sogar  fur  Naturwissenschaften  und  Medizin,  und 
die  europaische  Klassik  entnahm  der  durch  die  Altphilologie  vermittelten  An- 
tike  nicht  nur  die  Wertungen  fur  ihr  Welt-  und  Geschichtsverstandnis,  son- 
dern  zugleich  die  Leitlinien  fiir  Kunstanschauung  und  Menschenbild.  Die 
Inhalts-und  Aufgabenbestimmung,  die  Gliederung  und  Systematik  wurden  an- 
gesichts  einer  derartig  vielseitigen  gesellschaftlichen  Integration  des  Fachge- 
bietes  zur  unumganglichen  Notwendigkeit.  Auf  Goethes  Veranlassung— das 
aber  war  kein  Zufall  —  verfafite  1807  Friedrich  August  Wolf  seine  Darstellung 
der  Altertumswissenschaft  nach  Begriff,  Umfang,  Zweck  und  Wert,^  gewissermafien 
die  theoretische  Begriindung  des  Antikebildes  der  (deutschen)  Klassik.  Die 
Neo-Latin  Studies  kommen  in  dieser  Konzeption  begreiflicherweise  nicht  vor; 
denn  die  Klassik  hatte  nur  an  der  Antike  — und  nicht  einmal  mehr  an  der 
verchristlichten  —  ein  Interesse.  Auch  wurde  die  Tatsache  nicht  bewufit,  dafi 
Wolf  ^  selbst  ein  vortrefQicher  lateinischer  Stilist  war,  der  einen  grofien  Teil 
seiner  Opera  in  lateinischer  Sprache  abfafite,^  die  somit  zugleich  ein  For- 
schungsobjekt  der  Neolatinistik  ausmachen. 

Auf  die  klassische  oder  auch  klassizistische  Sicht  folgte  in  den  geschichts- 
verbundenen  Wissenschaften  im  vergangenen  Jahrhundert  der  Historismus 
gewissermafien  als  ideologisches  Korrelat  des  sich  rasant  entfaltenden  Kapi- 
talismus  — des  Industriekapitalismus,  des  Kapitalismus  der  freien  Konkurrenz 
und  endlich  des  Monopolkapitalismus.*  Objektive  historische  Gesetzmafiig- 
keiten  verneinend,  orientierte  jener  Historismus  auf  das  Einmalige,  Indivi- 
duelle  und  Unwiederholbare  in  der  Geschichte^  und  gab  damit  der  Detail-und 
Spezialforschung  entscheidende  Impulse.  In  der  Altertumswissenschaft  wurden 
die  historistischen  Positionen  namentlich  durch  die  Berliner  Vorlesungen  Au- 
gust Boeckhs  vorbereitet,  die  postum  unter  dem  Titel  Enzyklopddie  und  Metho- 
dologie  der  philologischen  Wissenschaften  1877  im  Druck  erschienen.  Der 
Vortragende  distanzierte  sich  mit  Nachdruck  von  der  klassizistischen  Betrach- 
tungsweise,  wenn  er  feststellte:  "Der  Zweck  der  Philologie  ist  rein  historisch; 
sie  stellt  die  Erkenntnis  des  Erkannten  objektiv  fiir  sich  hin."^  In  das  damit 
postulierte  historische  Herangehen  an  den  Forschungsgegenstand  werden  auch 
Sprache  und  Literatur  einbegriffen/  ein  fiir  Boeckhs  Epoche  bedeutender 
methodischer  Fortschritt;  die  Begrenzung  auf  das  Altertum  blieb  jedoch  ge- 
wahrt,  und  wo  von  der  Latinitat  des  Mittelalters  und  der  Neuzeit  die  Rede 
ist,  steht  diese  Rede  ganz  und  gar  im  Zeichen  des  Altertums.^ 

Doch  die  Enzyklopadie  der  klassischen  Altertumswissenschaft  wurde  nicht 
nur  theoretisch  postuliert,  sie  wurde  auch  praktisch  verwirklicht.  Es  genii gt, 
hier  einige  Werke  zufallig  herauszugreifen.  Am  gewichtigsten,  auch  im  inter- 


JOHANNES  IRMSCHER  213 

nationalen  Mafistab  gesehen,  ist  wohl  das  1886  von  Iwan  von  Miiller  gegriin- 
dete  Handbuch  der  kldssischen  Altertumswissenschqft,  das  nach  dem  Ersten  Welt- 
krieg  mit  einer  der  erweiterten  historischen  Sicht  Rechnung  tragenden 
Konzeption  als  Handbuch  der  Altertumswissenschajt  fortgefiihrt  wurde;  in  zweiter 
Reihe  ware,  ohne  dafi  das  franzosische  Pendant  iibersehen  werden  darf,  die 
1910  von  Alfred  Gercke  und  Eduard  Norden  initiierte  Einleitung  in  die  Alter- 
tumswissenschajt zu  nennen.  Hinsichdich  der  nach  dem  Zweiten  Weltkrieg  er- 
arbeiteten  Introduktionen  kann  ich  mich  eklektisch  auf  einige  Verfassernamen 
beschranken  —  Ettore  Bignone,  A.  Evaristo  Breccia,  Cesare  Bione  in  Italien, 
Leokadia  Matunowiczowna  in  Polen,  S.  I.  Radcig  in  der  Sowjetunion,  Ger- 
hard Jager  in  der  Bundesrepublik  Deutschland  — ;  denn  fiir  alle  diese  Werke, 
die  Einfiihrungen  wie  die  Handbiicher,  gilt  das  gleiche:  die  neulateinischen 
Studien  kommen  in  ihnen  nicht  vor. 

Aber  die  neulateinischen  Studien  sind  eine  Realitat;  denn  sie  verfiigen  iiber 
eine  Internationale  Assoziation,^  iiber  Internationale  Kongresse  und  auch 
iiber  eigene  Zeitschriften,^^  alles  Kriterien,  wie  wir  eingangs  deutlich  mach- 
ten,  die  heutzutage  die  Selbstandigkeit  einer  Wissenschaft  kennzeichnen  und 
iiber  das  Fehlen  eigener  Lehrstiihle  und  spezieller  Forschungseinrichtungen 
hinwegsehen  lassen.  Und  weiter:  die  neulateinischen  Studien,  obgleich  sie  sich, 
wie  schon  ihr  Name  besagt,  auf  die  Neuzeit  beziehen,  sind  doch  unlosbar  mit 
den  klassischen  verbunden.  Das  gilt  zuvorderst  fiir  die  Sprache  — das  Neu- 
latein  hat  sich  immer  wieder  mit  dem  ciceronianischen  auseinanderzusetzen, 
ohne  mit  ihm  je  identisch  zu  sein  — ,  gilt  fiir  die  Texttradition  und  Textedi- 
tion,  welch  letztere  von  den  bewahrten  Normen  und  Formen  und  oftmals  auch 
den  Editionsreihen  der  klassisch-philologischen  ausgeht,  gilt  fiir  Auspragung 
der  Inhalte,  die  dank  dem  Imitationsprinzip^^  ohne  Vertrautheit  mit  den  an- 
tiken  Vorbildern  weithin  unverstandlich  bleiben.  Alle  solche  Fakten  veran- 
lafiten  den  Berichterstatter,  der  iibrigens  bereits  1954  in  freilich  unzulanglicher 
Weise  die  neulateinischen  Studien  unter  dem  Oberbegriff  des  Nachwirkens  zu 
erfassen  versuchte,^^  diesen  ihren  Ort  im  System  der  klassischen  Altertums- 
wissenschaften  zu  bestimmen,  und  zwar  in  einer  urspriinglich  als  Hochschul- 
lehrbuch  konzipierten,^^  umfassenden  Einleitung  in  die  klassischen 
Altertumswissenschaften,  die  sich  zur  Zeit  im  Druck  befmdet  und  1986  im  Buch- 
handel  vorliegen  wird.  Das  Werk  geht  von  dem  veranderten  Bild  der  Antike 
aus,  das  die  letzten  Dezennien  erbracht  haben,  innerwissenschaftlich  durch 
die  Entwicklung  neuer  methodologischer  und  methodischer  Betrachtungswei- 
sen,  die  vertieftere  Einsichten  ermoglichten,  aufierwissenschaftlich  durch  die 
Dekolonisation,  welche  dazu  fiihrte,  auch  vergangene  Epochen  unter  welthi- 
storischem  Aspekt  zu  betrachten  und  in  die  Behandlung  des  Orbis  antiquus  die 
sogenannten  Randkulturen  voll  einzubeziehen.  Die  Neo-Latin  Studies  er- 
scheinen  in  dem  Buche  zweimal  unter  differenten  Gesichtspunkten.  Zum  er- 
sten fmdet  sich  unter  dem  Oberbegriff  Sprache  eine  Ubersicht  uber  Geschichte 
und  Grammatik  des  Mittel-  und  Neulateins.  Das  Neulatein,  eigentlich  neu- 


214  DIE   STELLUNG   DER   NEULATEINISCHEN  STUDIEN 

zeitliches  Latein,  wird  als  die  Sprachentwicklung  vom  Renaissancehumanis- 
mus  des  14./15.  Jahrhunderts  bis  zur  Gegenwart  charakterisiert,  es  wird  auf 
seine  sprachlichen  Sonderbildungen  hingewiesen  (einmal  Weiterleben  von  mit- 
tellateinischen  Phanomenen,  zum  anderen  Neologismen  vor  allem  gemaft  den 
einzelwissenschaftlichen  Entwicklungen)  und  eine  Grundbibliographie  darge- 
boten.  Zum  zweiten  erscheint  in  dem  Literaturteil  der  Einleitung  ein  Uber- 
blick,  in  dem  mittellateinische  und  Humanistenliteratur  verbunden  werden 
(eine  Verbindung,  iiber  deren  Berechtigung  und  Zweckmafiigkeit  sich,  wie 
zuzugeben,  durchaus  streiten  lafit).  Der  Anfang  der  neulateinischen  Literatur 
wird  ins  14.  Jahrhundert  gesetzt,  seit  dem  15. /16.  Jahrhundert  gewannen  die 
volkssprachigen  Literaturen,  so  wird  konstatiert,  das  qualitative,  seit  dem  18. 
auch  das  quantitative  Ubergewicht.  Seither  besitze  das  Lateinische  den  gewifi 
unverachtlichen  Rang  einer  internationalen  Wissenschaftssprache.  Als  bisher 
einzige  Einfiihrung  wird  IJsewijns  Companion  gewiirdigt. 

Mit  dieser  Fixierung  im  System  der  klassischen  Altertumswissenschaften 
haben  die  neulateinischen  Studien  ganz  gewifi  eine  gewichtige  Randposition 
gefunden,  welche  die  Traditionslinien  vor  Augen  fiihrt,  in  die  ihre  Inhalte  ein- 
gebettet  sind.  Diese  Position  weist  jenen  Studien  zugleich  den  Rang  einer 
selbstandigen  Disziplin  zu,  deren  Konnex  zu  den  altertumswissenschaftlichen 
Fachern  offenkundig  ist.  Aber  sie  bleibt  unter  diesem  Aspekt  mit  Notwen- 
digkeit  stets  eine  Randposition,  bei  welcher,  um  eine  treffende  Formulierung 
Walther  Ludwigs  aufzunehmen,  die  vertikale  Fragestellung^'^  in  den  Vorder- 
grund  geriickt  ist.  Manche  Erfahrung  spricht  allerdings  dafiir,  dafi  gerade 
von  dieser  Randposition  her  sich  fiir  die  Neolatinistik  erhebliche  Chancen  zu 
einer  voUkommenen  Verselbstandigung  und  Etablierung  ergeben;  denn  ein 
Grofiteil  ihrer  Adepten  kommt  doch  nun  einmal  von  der  klassischen  Philologie 
her,  und  daran  wird  sich  angesichts  des  iiberall  zu  bemerkenden  Riickgangs 
des  altsprachlichen  Unterrichts  und  des  damit  verbundenen  Riickgangs  der 
Lateinkenntnisse  in  alien  Studiengebieten  auch  in  absehbarer  Zukunft  nichts 
andern. 

Aber  neben  der  vertikalen  Fragestellung  gibt  es  ebeh  auch  die  nicht  zu  iiber- 
sehende  wichtigere  horizontale;  denn  die  Autoren  neulateinischen  Schrifttums 
schrieben  und  schreiben  ja  nicht,  um  in  Form  und  Inhalt  Antike  zu  wieder- 
holen,  sondern  benutzten  und  benutzen  die  antike  Uberlieferung,  um  auf  ihre 
Gegenwart  einzuwirken.'^  Diese  Gegenwart  war  iiberaus  vielgestaltig  und 
umfafite  zuzeiten,  insbesondere  als  sich  am  Anfang  der  Neuzeit  in  Renaissance 
und  Humanismus  das  Neulatein  zu  entfalten  begann,  samtliche  Bereiche 
sprachlicher  Aufierung,  der  schriftlichen  und  der  uns  naturgemafi  nur  ein- 
geschrankt  fafibaren  miindlichen,^^  wahrend  in  unseren  Tagen  die  Neola- 
tinitat  auf  einige  wenige  literarische  Bezirke  begrenzt  ist  und  die  miindliche 
Verwendung  sich  fast  ganzlich  im  Padagogischen  bewegt  — in  die  Diskussion 
um  die  Schaffung  von  Welthilfssprachen  ist  das  Neulatein  trotz  Eignung  und 
Bewahrung  gegenwartig  kaum  einbezogen.  Ich  folge  dem  Companion  to  Neo- 


JOHANNES  IRMSCHER  215 

Latin  studies^^  von  Jozef  IJsewjin,  dem  verdienstvollen  Fundator,  Theoretiker 
und  Organisator  der  neulateinischen  Philologie,  wenn  ich  nachstehend  einige 
der  Kommunikationsbereiche  aufzahle,  in  denen  das  Neulatein  begegnete  und 
sogar  noch  begegnet/^  und  dabei  Folgerungen  fiir  unsere  Thematik  ziehe. 

Philologie  hat  es  naturgemafi  in  erster  Reihe  mit  Literatur  und  Literatur- 
geschichte  zu  tun,  und  wenn  auch  die  neulateinischen  Opera  in  ihrer  Mehr- 
zahl  keine  Weltliteratur  darstellen,  sofern  man  unter  Weltliteratur  das  die  Zeiten 
Uberdauernde,  heute  und  wahrscheinlich  auch  noch  morgen  Giiltige 
versteht  —  eine  Feststellung,  die  iibrigens  auf  viele  Literaturen  zutrifft— ,  so 
hat  sie  doch  in  alien  ihren  Leistungen  eine  unverachtliche  geschichtliche  und 
kulturgeschichtliche  Bedeutung.  Sie  hat  die  antiken  mit  Einschlufi  der  antik- 
christlichen  Formen  allseitig  weiterentwickelt  und  dabei  mancherlei  eigenar- 
tige,  neue  Gestaltungsweisen  zutage  gebracht  wie  z.B.  das  Ordensdrama  oder 
das  Hodoeporicum  oder  die  Widmungsvorrede,  und  sie  lebt  mancherorts  als 
Dichtung  fort  — man  kann  solche  Bemiihungen  fiir  weltfremd  erachten,  indes 
sie  existieren,  und  die  lateinischen  Dichtungen  Papst  Leos  XIII. ^^  und  Her- 
mann Wellers^^  (1878-1956)  vermogen  auch  vom  Asthetischen  her  zu  be- 
stehen.  Doch  trotz  allem  nimmt  die  Komparatistik,  die  Vergleichende 
Literaturwissenschaft,  von  der  neulateinischen  Literatur  kaum  Notiz,^'  und 
wenn  die  Vergleichende  Literaturwissenschaft  ein  System  der  von  ihr  zur  Kom- 
paration  herangezogenen  Literaturen  besafie,  so  miifiten  darin  die  neulatei- 
nischen Literaturprodukte  mehr  als  nur  eine  Randposition  einnehmen  —  aber 
eine  solche  Systematik  gibt  es  nicht^^  oder  noch  nicht. 

Doch  auch  eine  Geschichte  der  neulateinischen  Literatur  ist  noch  nicht  ge- 
schrieben  worden,  und  man  kann  gewifi  dariiber  diskutieren,  ob  sie  iiber- 
haupt  geschrieben  werden  kann.  Dafi  das  Unterfangen  ein  Wagnis  ware,  steht 
aufier  Zweifel,  hat  ja  selbst  ein  Georg  Ellinger  sich  auf  die  deutsche  Entwick- 
lung  beschrankt.^^  Aber  Ellinger  hat  dabei  diese  deutsche  Entwicklung  in  die 
europaischen  Zusammenhange  geriickt  und  auf  diese  Weise  die  Notwendig- 
keit  jenes  Unterfangens  verdeutlicht.  In  der  Tat:  ein  Handbuch  von  der  Art 
der  positivistischen  Darstellungen  der  klassischen  Latinitat  wiirde  das  schon 
jetzt  kaum  mehr  iiberschaubare  Material  in  einheitlicher  Form  prasent  machen 
und  dabei  Gemeinsamkeiten  wie  Eigenheiten  der  Neolatinitat  der  verschie- 
denen  Lander  verdeutlichen.  Denn  es  gehort  ja  zu  den  Propria  der  neula- 
teinischen Literatur,  dafi  sie  sich  allenthalben  in  enger  Bindung  an  die 
Nationalliteraturen  entfaltete.^'^  Konsequenterweise  miifite  sie  daher  in  den 
Systemen  nahezu  samtlicher  europaischer  Philologien^^  eine  feste  und  nicht 
blofi  eine  Randposition  fmden.  Dem  ist  jedoch  noch  keineswegs  so.  Ich  greife 
nur  zufallige  Beispiele  heraus,  die  indes  charakteristisch  sind.  In  dem  Hand- 
buch der  germanischen  Philologie  von  Friedrich  Stroh,  Berlin  1952,  820  Seiten  um- 
fassend,  wird  ausdriicklich  von  einem  "System  der  germanischen  Philologie" 
gesprochen.  In  diesem  System  erscheint  die  deutsche  Neolatinitat  unter  dem 
Obertitel  "Neuere  deutsche  Literaturgeschichte"  mit  drei  rasonierenden  bib- 


2l6 


DIE  STELLUNG   DER  NEULATEINISCHEN   STUDIEN 


liographischen  Angaben^^  und  im  historischen  Abrifi  mit  dem  Hinweis  auf  El- 
lingers  Aufsatz  iiber  "Grundfragen  und  Aufgaben  der  neulateinischen  Philo- 
logie"  von  1931.  Das  ist  alles!^^  Doch  es  kommt  noch  schlimmer.  In  dem 
dreibandigen  Handbuch  Deutsche  Philologie  im  Aufrifi,  das  Wolfgang  Stammler 
im  Verein  mit  einem  vielkopfigen  Mitarbeiterstab  1952  begann,^^  hat  zwar 
das  mittellateinische  Schrifttum  des  deutschen  Sprachraums  seinen  Ort  ge- 
funden,  die  Neolatinitat  dagegen  wird  mit  keinem  Wort  gewiirdigt.  Es  bedarf 
also  noch  harten  Kampfes,  bis  sich  die  neulateinische  Philologie  unter  den 
alteren  Schwestern  den  ihr  gebiihrenden  Platz  erstritten  haben  wird. 

Das  Neulatein  war  bis  zu  seiner  Ablosung  durch  das  Franzosische  Sprache 
der  Diplomatic,  es  war  in  Ungarn  bis  weit  ins  vergangene  Jahrhundert  hinein 
Sprache  des  Parlaments,  war  Sprache  der  Administration,  der  staatlichen, 
kommunalen,  kirchlichen  und  nicht  zuletzt  auch  der  akademischen,  die  sich 
fur  ihre  Diplome  bis  heute  noch  dieses  Idioms  bedient.  Offiziellen  wie  pri- 
vaten  Charakter  tragen  lateinisch  abgefafite  Inschriften,  und  wenn  deren  hi- 
storische  Ergiebigkeit  auch  geringer  ist  — mit  Notwendigkeit  geringer  sein 
mufi  — als  die  der  Inskriptionen  des  Altertums,  so  ist  es  trotzdem  begriindet, 
wenn  vielerorts  Korpora  des  neulateinischen  Inschriftengutes  entstehen.^^  Wo 
aber  wird  je  bewufit  gemacht,  dafi  diese  neulateinische  Sprachform  nicht  mit 
der  klassischen  identisch  ist,  weder  in  der  Aussprache  noch  in  der  Grammatik 
noch  in  der  Syntax  noch  im  Wortschatz?  Man  verlangt  von  dem  angehenden 
Neuhistoriker  ein  Latinum,  das  sich  in  der  Regel  an  Casar  und  Cicero  orien- 
tiert,  ware  aber  nicht  ein  Neolatinum  weitaus  angebrachter  und  hilfreicher? 
Dafi  die  klassizistische  Sicht  noch  immer  dominieren  kann,  ergibt  sich  zwangs- 
laufig  aus  der  Tatsache,  dafi  keine  Einleitung  in  die  Geschichtswissenschaft, 
und  speziell  in  die  neuzeitliche,  die  neulateinische  Philologie  als  Zweig-  und 
Hilfswissenschaft  zu  benennen  weifi,  so  breitgefachert  ansonsten  die  historische 
Systematik  auch  sein  mag.  Auf  der  anderen  Seite  ist  es  bei  dieser  Sachlage 
nicht  verwunderlich,  dafi  sprachliche  Untersuchungen  zum  Neulatein  nur  recht 
sporadisch  begegnen,  so  erfreulich  es  auch  ist,  dafi  die  Arbeit  an  einem  Lexicon 
linguae  Latinae  recentioris  aufgenommen  wurde.^^ 

Niemand  braucht  iiber  das  Neulatein  als  Sprache  der  Wissenschaft  belehrt 
zu  werden,  da  dieser  Verwendungsbereich  der  offenkundigste  und  auch  ge- 
genwartig  noch  vielf altig  lebendig  ist.  Die  philologischen  Textreihen  bedienen 
sich  nach  wie  vor  der  lateinischen  Prafation,  und  da  und  dort  gibt  es  auch 
noch  altphilologische  Abhandlungen  in  lateinischer  Sprache,  ohne  dafi  bisher 
jemand  iiber  die  Spezifika  dieser  Diktion  reflektiert  hatte.  Dafi  die  philosophi- 
sche  Fachsprache  bis  mindestens  zum  Ende  des  19.  Jahrhunderts  in  weitem 
Umfange  das  Lateinische  geblieben  war,  lehrt  ein  Blick  in  die 
Nachschlagewerke  — Bacon,  Hobbes,  Descartes,  Gassendi,  Spinoza,  Leibniz, 
Christian  Wolff  haben  ihr  Oeuvre  ganz  oder  teilweise  in  lateinischer  Sprache 
niedergelegt,  ^^  und  selbst  ein  Afrikaner  namens  Amo  promovierte  1734  in 
Halle  mit  einer  Dissertation  De  humanae  mentis  apatheia?^  Die  grofie  Comenius- 


JOHANNES  IRMSCHER  217 

ausgabe,  welche  die  tschechoslowakische  Wissenschaft  tragt,  bezeugt  das  Neu- 
latein  2ils  Ausdrucksmittel  der  Padagogik.  An  der  Gregoriana  in  Rom  wird  heute 
nicht  mehr  in  lateinischer  Sprache  vorgetragen;  aber  dafi  die  Terminologie  der 
Theologie  in  alien  ihren  Sparten  lateinisch  herausgebildet  und  fortentwickelt 
wurde  und  noch  fortentwickelt  wird,  steht  aufier  Zweifel.  Dafi  das  romische 
Recht  eine  "Neo-Latin  legal  literature"^^  herauffiihrte,  wird  ebenfalls  nicht 
verwundern.  Aber  auch  wer  die  Geschichte  der  Naturwissenschaften  und  der 
Medizin  betreibt,  kommt  an  der  Neolatinistik  nicht  voriiber.  Der  Magdeburger 
Biirgermeister  Otto  von  Guericke  (1602-1686)  fafite  seine  physikalischen  Ent- 
deckungen  in  der  Schrift  Experimente  nova  (ut  vocantur)  Magdeburgica  de  vacuo  spa- 
tio  zusammen,^"^  und  der  grofie  Naturforscher  des  19.  Jahrhunderts  Hermann 
Helmholtz  (1821-1894)  dissertierte  1842  De  fabrica  systematis  nervosi  evertebra- 
torurr?^  {Uber  den  Bau  des  Nervensy stems  der  Wirbellosen).  Uber  die  Latinitat  aller 
solcher  Autoren  gibt  es,  soweit  ich  sehe,  keine  Untersuchungen. 

Kein  Naturwissenschaftler  schreibt  heute  mehr  lateinische  Biicher.  Aber 
Mediziner,  Pharmakologen,  Botaniker  und  Zoologen  haben  fur  ihre  Spezi- 
alia  ihre  eigene  Latinitat,  ihr  Fachlatein.^^  In  friiheren  Zeiten,  als  die  alten 
Sprachen  das  Fundament  der  Allgemeinbildung  ausmachten,  pragten  die  An- 
gehorigen  jener  Berufe  ihr  Fachlatein  selbst;  heuzutage  konnen  sie  der  Hilfe 
des  Philologen  nicht  mehr  entraten^^  —  eine  offenbare  Chance  fur  die  neula- 
teinischen  Studien! 

Die  neulateinischen  Studien  haben  ihre  wissenschaftlichen,  aber  auch  ihre 
praktischen  Aufgaben.  Um  diese  wahrzunehmen,  bediirfen  sie  einerseits  der 
Organisation,  wie  sie  bereits  besteht,  zum  zweiten  aber  auch  der  festen  Ein- 
ordnung  in  die  bestehenden  oder  sich  herausbildenden  Wissenschaftssysteme, 
was  wiederum  die  Konstituierung,  das  heifit  die  Systembildung  und  Physio- 
gnomiebildung,  der  Neolatinistik  in  sich  selbst^^  voraussetzt.  Ich  meine,  um 
die  Neolatinistik  als  eigenstandige  Disziplin  bewufit  werden  zu  lassen,  sollte 
dieser  synthetischen  Prasentation  standige  Aufmerksamkeit  geschenkt  werden. 


Anmerkungen 

1.  Fr.  Aug.  Wolf,  Kleine  Schriften  in  lateinischer  und  deutscher  Sprache ,  hgg.  von  G.  Bern- 
hardy,  2,  Halle  1869,  808  ff.;  dort  S.  894  f.  der  "Uberblick  samtlicher  Teile  der  Al- 
tertumswissenschaft . " 

2.  Bei  Jozef  IJsewijn,  Companion  to  Neo-Latin  studies,  Amsterdam  1977,  129  und  370 
ist  die  Schreibung  Wolff  zu  verbessern. 

3.  Zusammengefafit  bei  Wolf  a. a. O.  2,  1869. 

4.  Sachworterbuch  zur  Geschichte  Deutschlands  und  der  deutschen  Arbeiterbewegung,  1 ,  Berlin 
1969,  898  f. 

5.  Sachworterbuch  a.a.O.  792  f 

6.  August  Boeckh,  Encyklopddie  und  Methodologie  der  philologischen  Wissenschaften,  hgg. 
von  Ernst  Bratuscheck,  2.  Aufl.  von  Rudolf  Klufimzmn,  Leipzig  1886,  18. 


2l8  DIE  STELLUNG   DER  NEULATEINISCHEN   STUDIEN 


7.  Boeckh  a.a.O.  649  ff. 

8.  Vgl.  etwa  Boeckh  a.a.O.  300  ff .  —  Angesichts  dieser  Situation  war  es  eine  Pio- 
niertat,  wenn  Ferd.  Philippi  iiber  Die  Latinitdt  der  Neuern  von  dem  Wiederaufleben  der  Wis- 
senschaften  bis  auf  unsere  Zeiten,  Leipzig  1825,  eine  Anthologie  vorlegte,  freilich  mit  der 
Abzweckung  als  Hilfsbuchfur  den  Unterricht  im  lateinischen  Stil  undfixr  Bildung  des  Geschmacks. 

9.  Association  internationale  d'etudes  neo-latines;  die  Statuten  sind  abgedruckt  Humanisti- 
ca  Lovaniensia  24,  1975,  370  ff.  Vgl.  auch  J.  IJsewijn,  "La  philologie  neo-latine  dans 
le  monde"  in:  Het  belgisch  humanisme,  Stand,  onderzoekingen,  vooruitzichten,  Antwerpen  1966, 
44  ff. 

10.  Am  wichtigsten  sind  wohl  die  Humanistica  Lovaniensia  mit  dem  regelmafiigen 
Uberblick  iiber  die  "Instrumenta":  "Instrumentum  criticum,"  "Instrumentum  bibli- 
ographicum,"  "Instrumentum  lexicographicum." 

11.  Richtig  Heinz  Entner,  Deutsche  Literaturzeitung  106,  1985,  375:  "Neulateinische 
Dichtung  als  Ganzes  bleibt  stets  bezogen  auf  ihr  antikes  Vorbild.  Sie  gewinnt  eine  ei- 
gene  Physiognomie  aber  dadurch,  dafi  sie  dieses  Vorbild  nicht  lediglich  wiederholt,  son- 
dern  die  in  ihm  vorgebildeten  Gestaltungsmoglichkeiten  auf  zeitgenossische  Themen 
und  Bediirfnisse  anwendet,  dabei  in  ein  'produktives  Verhaltnis'  zur  Antike  tritt." 

12.  Johannes  Irmscher,  Praktische  Einfiihrung  in  das  Studium  der  Altertumswissenschaft, 
Berlin  1954,  135. 

13.  Johannes  Irmscher,  EAZ  Ethnographisch-archdologische  Zeitschrift  20,  1979,  123  ff. 

14.  Walther  Ludwig,  Gnomon  44,  1972,  220. 

15.  In  ahnliche  Richtung  geht  die  Feststellung  von  Alain  Michel,  Bulletin  de  I  As- 
sociation Guillaume  Bude  1976,  348,  vom  "caractere  formateur"  und  dem  gleichzeitigen 
"caractere  mediateur"  des  Neulateins. 

16.  Ich  notiere  als  Lesefrucht  bei  Wolf  a.a.O.  1,  XIII,  dafi  der  Hallenser  Aufkla- 
rungstheologe  Johann  Salomo  Semler  (1725-1791)  selbst  in  den  Tagen  schwerer  Krank- 
heit  halbe  Stunden  lang  lateinisch  sprach. 

17.  Angezeigt  von  Wolfgang  O.  Schmitt,  Deutsche  Literaturzeitung  99,  1978,  655  ff. 

18.  IJsewijn  a.a.O.  262  ff. 

19.  Einfiihrung  bei  Otto  Stange  — Paul  Dittrich,  Vox  Latina,  3,  Leipzig  1924,  143  f. 

20.  Uber  Werk  und  Autor  vgl.  Otto  Schumann,  Romanische  Forschungen  60,  1947, 
606  und  615. 

21 .  Mit  Recht  beklagt  von  Wolfgang  Bernard  Fleischmann  bei  Horst  Riidiger,  Kom- 
paratistik.  Aufgaben  und  Methoden,  Stuttgart  1973,  85. 

22.  Wie  der  gehaltvolle  Beitrag  von  Henry  H.  H.  Remak  bei  Riidiger  a.a.O.  11 
ff.  deutlich  macht. 

23.  Georg  EUinger,  Geschichte  der  neulateinischen  Literatur  Deutschlands  im  sechzehntenjahr- 
hundert,  Berlin  1929  ff.  (Eine  bemerkenswerte  Einschatzung  von  Werk  und  Autor  bei 
Hans-Georg  Roloff  in:  Victor  Lange  —  Hans-Georg  Roloff,  Dichtung  — Sprache  — 
Gesellschaft,  Frankfurt  1971,  245). 

24.  Zum  einschlagigen  Forschungsstand  vgl.  Karl  Otto  Conrady,  Euphorion  49,  1955, 
413  ff. 

25.  Wobei  die  auf  Amerika  tendierenden  Ableger  voll  einzubeziehen  sind;  vgl.  etwa 
Manuel  Briceno  Jauregui,  "La  poesia  en  latin  en  Iberoamerica"  bei  P.  Tuynman, 
G.  C.  Kuiper,  E.  KeMer,  Acta  conventus  Neo-Latini  Amstelodamensis,  Miinchen  1979,  149  ff. 

26.  Friedrich  Stroh,  Handbuch  der  germanischen  Philologie,  Berlin  (West)  1952,  608. 

27.  In  diesem  Zusammenhang  sei  auf  Giinter  Hess,  "Deutsche  Literaturgeschichte 
und  neulateinische  Literatur.  Aspekte  einer  gestorten  Rezeption"  bei  Tuynman,  Kuiper, 
Kefiler  a.a.O.  493  ff.  nachdriicklich  hingewiesen. 

28.  Wolfgang  Stammler,  Deutsche  Philologie  im  Aufrifi,  3  Bande,  Berlin  (West)  1952, 


JOHANNES  IRMSCHER  QIQ 

1954,  1957;  die  Darstellung der  mittellateinischen  Literatur  von  Karl  Hauck  fmdet  sich 
Band  2,  1841  ff. 

29.  Mir  liegt  vor:  Die  deutschen  Inschriften,  Berliner  Reihe,  1:  Ernst  Schubert— Jiirgen 
Gorlitz,  Die  Inschriften  des  Naumburger  Doms  und  der  Domjreiheit,  Berlin  1959;  2:  Ernst  Schu- 
bert, Die  Inschriften  der  Stadt  Naumburg  an  der  Saale,  Berlin  1960. 

30.  IJsewijn  a.a.O.  248  f. 

31.  Friedrich  Ueberweg,  Grundriji  der  Geschichte  der  Philosophie,  3,  10.  Aufl.  von  Msix 
Heinze,  Berlin  1907,  72,  78,  88,  103,  115,  204  ff.,  226. 

32.  Johannes  Irmscher  in:  Acta  omnium  gentium  ac  nationum  conventus  Latinis  litteris  lin- 
guaeque  fovendis  a  die  XIII  ad  diem  XVI  mensis  Aprilis  a.  MDCCCCLXXVII  Dacariae  habiti, 
Rom  1979,  388  ff. 

33.  Formulierung  von  Richard  J.  Schoeck  bei  J.  IJsewijn  und  E.  Kefiler,  Acta  Con- 
ventus Neo-Latini  Lovaniensis,  Leuven  1973,  577  ff. 

34.  Eine  zweisprachige  Neuausgabe  wird  von  der  Technischen  Hochschule  Mag- 
deburg vorbereitet. 

35.  Hermann  Helmholtz,  Wissenschaftliche  Abhandlungen,  2,  Leipzig  1883,  663  ff . — 
Auch  der  Helmholtz  zeitlich  vorangehende  Astronom  Karl  Friedrich  Gaufi  (1777-1815) 
schrieb  ein  vorbildliches  Latein  (Stange  —  Dittrich  a.a.O.  142). 

36.  Vgl.  das  fiir  pharmazeutische  Berufe  bestimmte  Buch  von  Karl-Heinz  Schulz, 
Fachlatein.  Lateinische  Formenlehre — Rezepturlesen  —  Nomenklatur  von  A  —  Z ,  3.  Aufl.  Leipzig 
1964. 

37.  Die  Dissertation  von  Anton  Orlt,  Die  lateinische  Diagnose  in  der  Botanik.  Untersu- 
chungen  zum  lexikalischen  und  syntaktischen  Inventar,  Berlin  1984,  wurde  gleichzeitig  von  dem 
Botaniker  und  dem  klassischen  Philologen  betreut. 

38.  Die  Feststellung  von  Georg  Ellinger,  Germanisch-romanische Monatsschrift  21 ,  1933, 
1,  es  fehlten  noch  "feste  Grundsatze  fiir  einen  einheitlichen  Betrieb  dieses  Wissens- 
zweiges,"  hat  auch  heute  zu  einem  Gutteil  Giiltigkeit. 


Gassendi's  Defence  of  Galileo: 
The  Politics  of  Discretion 

Howard  Jones 

The  rapidity  with  which  scientific  discoveries  are  communicated  and 
assimilated  is  such  a  feature  of  this  age  that  it  seems  remarkable  that 
in  1642  the  French  philosopher  and  scientist  Pierre  Gassendi,  who 
was  at  the  centre  of  intellectual  activity  in  Europe,  should  have  been  busy  writ- 
ing lengthy  letters  explaining  the  heliostatic  theory  which  had  been  announced 
in  Copernicus'  De  Revolutionibus  Orbium  Coelestium  ninety-nine  years  previously. 
Yet  it  has  to  be  recognised  that  far  from  marking  any  immediate  and  decisive 
change  in  contemporary  thinking  about  the  universe,  Copernicus'  book  had 
little  impact  for  decades  after  its  publication.  Arthur  Koestler  certainly  exag- 
gerates when  he  calls  it  "the  book  that  nobody  read,"  but  not  by  much.  Not 
all  of  the  one-thousand  copies  of  the  1543  Nuremberg  printing  were  sold,  and 
it  was  reprinted  only  twice  in  the  next  seventy-five  years  —  and  this  at  a  time 
when  other  works  on  astronomy  were  receiving  multiple  editions.  More  im- 
portant, however,  is  the  fact  that  those  who  did  read  it  took  it  as  no  more  than 
one  further  hypothetical  calculation  of  the  positions  and  motions  of  the  earth 
and  the  celestial  bodies,  a  mathematical  computation  designed  to  do  no  more 
than  "save  the  phenomena."  That  Copernicus  himself  regarded  his  calculations 
as  more  than  hypotheticaJ  was  given  little,  if  any,  notice  due  to  the  fact  that 
the  person  responsible  for  printing  the  book,  the  Lutheran  theologian  Andreas 
Osiander,  inserted  an  anonymous  and  unauthorised  Preface  expressly  calcu- 
lated to  reassure  the  schoolmen  and  the  theologians  by  emphasising  that  "these 
hypotheses  need  not  be  true  nor  even  probable;  if  they  provide  a  calculus  con- 
sistent with  the  observations,  that  alone  is  sufficient."^ 

During  the  closing  decades  of  the  century,  however,  certain  factors  com- 
bined to  alter  the  situation  significantly.  First  of  all,  astronomers  who  did  read 
Copernicus'  book  found  that  his  data,  computations,  and  diagrams  became 
indispensible  to  their  own  research,  even  if  they  did  not  accept  his  central  the- 
sis, and  this  served  to  increase  his  general  reputation.  The  most  pressing  fac- 
tor, however,  was  the  increasing  number  of  observations  which  proved  to  be 


222 


GASSENDIS   DEFENSE  OF  GALILEO 


Dcr  Qclchvtcv  2u  duicr  zcit. 


^^r  au  ui^tu    leoefi    re  cm  '\rrui  Scnon  , 
( vz//  fciticin  nuts   mtt  rtit£  tuicfi    arfin  . 

JDer^nii/5  ate  drci   ^^tuc^Qm  fniltcni£em  , 
niz  fe'^n  i.ma  rwren  dro6^  fttfF  feiri  • 


HOWARD  JONES  223 

at  variance  with  the  prevailing  Ptolemaic/ Aristotehan  system  but  generally  con- 
formed to  the  system  proposed  by  Copernicus.  In  1572  Tycho  Brzihe  observed 
a  new  star  in  the  constellation  Cassiopeia  which  appeared  and  gradually  faded 
over  a  period  of  eighteen  months,  a  phenomenon  which  demonstrated,  contra 
Aristotle,  that  change  could  and  did  occur  in  the  region  of  the  fixed  stars;  five 
years  later  Tycho  observed  a  comet  beyond  the  sphere  of  the  moon  which  must 
have  penetrated  Aristode's  supposedly  impenetrable  crystalline  spheres.  In  1604 
Galileo  observed  another  new  star,  this  time  in  the  constellation  Serpentarius, 
and  following  his  first  use  of  the  telescope  five  years  later  he  was  able  to  make 
a  number  of  even  more  dramatic  announcements,  some  in  the  Starry  Messenger 
(1610),  others  in  the  History  and  Demonstrations  concerning  Sunspots{\^W)  —  an- 
nouncements which  further  damaged  the  Aristotelean  doctrine  of  the  perfec- 
tion and  immutability  of  the  celestial  sphere:  the  fact  that  the  surface  of  the 
moon  is  not  smooth  and  exactly  spherical  but  shows  a  landscape  similar  to  that 
of  the  earth;  the  discovery  of  four  satellites  of  Jupiter  (the  Medicean  stars)  ap- 
pearing in  different  positions  at  different  times;  the  fact  that  the  sun  displayed 
spots  on  its  surface;  and  finally,  the  fact  that  Venus  shows  phases  and  must 
revolve  around  the  sun.  As  Bernard  Cohen  says,  "Prior  to  1609  the  Coper- 
nican  system  had  seemed  to  men  a  mere  mathematical  speculation.  . 
.  .  But  after  1609  .  .  .  they  had  to  accept  the  fact  that  the  telescope  showed  the 
world  to  be  non-Ptolemaic  and  non- Aristotelian.  .  .  .  There  were  only  two  pos- 
sibilities open:  One  was  to  refuse  to  look  through  the  telescope  .  .  .  the  other 
was  to  reject  the  physics  of  Aristotle  and  the  astronomy  of  Ptolemy."^ 

Now  this  does  not  mean  that  the  observations  of  Galileo  and  others  left  the 
Copernican  system  unchallenged.  Indeed,  it  was  the  system  of  Tycho  Brahe, 
which  could  be  accomodated  to  all  the  new  telescopic  discoveries,  that  gained 
most.  As  a  "half-way"  house  between  the  Ptolemaic  and  Copernican  systems, 
it  provided  a  convenient  retreat  for  many  who  were  constrained  to  recognise 
the  demise  of  the  Ptolemaic  system  and  acknowledge  certain  features  of  the 
Copernican,  but  who  wished  to  preserve  the  immobility  of  the  earth.  More- 
over, in  the  absence  of  any  conclusive  proof  of  the  earth's  motion  the  long- 
standing physical  objections  to  it  were  formidable.  After  zdl,  the  arguments 
first  advanced  by  Aristotle  in  the  De  Caelo  and  Ptolemy  in  the  Almagest,  ar- 
guments which  had  been  elaborated  upon  since  the  fourteenth  century  and  were 
now  being  taken  up  again  with  serious  purpose,  started  with  the  overwhelm- 
ing advantage  that  all  the  evidence  of  the  senses  seemed  to  be  in  accord  with 
an  earth  at  rest.'^  It  was  argued,  for  example,  that  if  the  earth  rotated  from 
west  to  east  then  clouds  and  birds  would  seem  always  to  be  carried  violently 
westwards;  we  would  constantly  experience  a  rushing  east  wind;  an  object 
hurled  into  the  air  would  never  fall  back  to  the  point  from  which  it  was  thrown, 
since  that  point  would  have  moved  far  to  the  east  while  the  object  was  in  the 
air;  a  ball  dropped  from  a  tower  would  hit  the  ground  not  at  the  base  of  the 
tower  but  at  a  point  to  the  west  of  it;  a  cannon  fired  towards  the  west  would 


224  GASSENDI'S  DEFENSE  OF  GALILEO 

attain  a  greater  range  than  one  fired  to  the  east,  and  a  cannonball  fired  to- 
wards the  north  or  south  would  fall  always  to  the  west  of  its  target.^  How- 
ever, as  far  back  as  the  fourteenth  century  Nicole  Oresme  had  brought  forward 
an  array  of  counter-arguments,  many  of  which  anticipated  those  adduced  in 
the  sixteenth  century.  But  as  long  as  the  question  was  debated  in  the  context 
of  Aristotelian  physics  these  counter-arguments  could  be  appreciated  for  their 
ingenuity,  and  might  convince  some,  but  for  the  majority  they  were  no  an- 
swer to  the  seemingly  unshakeable  evidence  of  the  senses  —  for  it  is  important 
to  recognise  the  force  of  conviction  which  sensory  experience  commanded.  As 
Burtt  remarks,  ".  .  .  it  is  safe  to  say  that  even  had  there  been  no  religious  scru- 
ples whatever  against  the  Copernican  astronomy,  sensible  men  all  over  Eu- 
rope .  .  .  would  have  pronounced  it  a  wild  appeal  to  accept  the  premature  fruits 
of  an  uncontrolled  imagination,  in  preference  to  the  solid  inductions,  built  up 
gradually  through  the  ages,  of  men's  confirmed  sense  experience."^  What  the 
heliostatic  theory  needed  was  a  new  physics  for  a  moving  earth,  and  it  was 
towards  the  elaboration  of  this  non- Aristotelian  physics  that  a  good  portion 
of  Galileo's  work  on  kinematics  and  dynamics  was  directed  —  though  it  must 
be  emphasised  that  by  substituting  a  new  terrestrial  physics  for  the  Aristotel- 
ian system  Galileo  could  not  hope  to  provide  positive  proof  of  the  earth's  mo- 
tion. Indeed,  this  was  not  forthcoming  until  Bessel's  detection  of  stellar  parallax 
in  1837.  The  most  that  Galileo  could  achieve  was  to  deprive  the  proponents 
of  a  fixed  earth  of  arguments  based  upon  the  observable  behaviour  of  falling 
bodies  and  projectiles  by  demonstrating  that  this  behaviour  was  as  compat- 
able  with  a  moving  earth  as  with  an  earth  at  rest. 

The  most  interesting  aspects  of  Galileo's  work  in  this  regard  are  his  recog- 
nition of  the  relativity  of  motions,  his  demonstration  that  under  certain  cir- 
cumstances one  motion  may  be  superimposed  upon  another  without  effect  upon 
either,  and  his  anticipation  in  limited  form  of  Newton's  First  Law,  the  prin- 
ciple of  inertia.  It  is  in  his  last  work,  the  Two  New  Sciences,  published  in  Hol- 
land in  1638,  four  years  before  his  death,  that  Galileo  presents  his  fullest 
mathematical  demonstrations  of  these  principles,  but  it  is  the  Dialogue  concern- 
ing the  Two  Chief  World  Systems  of  1632  which  furnishes  the  most  systematic  ap- 
plication of  them  to  the  physical  arguments  outlined  above.  Since  it  is  a 
reference  which  has  a  long  history  in  the  debate  and  will  be  central  to  Gas- 
sendi's  presentation  of  Galileo's  views,  we  may  abstract  from  the  wealth  of  il- 
lustrations employed  by  Galileo's  spokesman  in  the  Dialogue,  Salviati,  the 
arguments  concerning  falling  bodies  and  projectiles  aboard  a  moving  ship.  Ac- 
cording to  Aristotelian  physics  a  ball  dropped  from  the  top  of  the  mast  of  a 
moving  ship  ought  to  hit  the  deck  some  distance  behind  the  mast;  similarly, 
an  arrow  shot  upwards  from  the  deck  ought  to  fall  back  at  a  point  closer  to 
the  stern. ^  Quite  the  contrary,  Salviati  argues.  The  ball  will  fall  at  the  foot 
of  the  mast  and  the  arrow  at  the  precise  point  from  which  it  was  fired.  In  short, 
to  our  perception  the  behaviour  of  a  falling  body  or  a  projectile  will  be  exactly 


HOWARD  JONES  225 

the  same  whether  the  ship  is  in  motion  or  at  rest.  Hence,  nothing  can  be  in- 
ferred from  such  experiments  as  to  whether  the  ship  is  in  motion  or  stationary, 
and  by  analogy  the  same  is  true  concerning  the  mobihty  or  stabiUty  of  the 
earth. ^  Simply  put,  the  explanation  which  Salviati  (Galileo)  offers  is  that  in 
the  case  of  neither  the  ball  nor  the  arrow  are  we  dealing  with  a  single  per- 
pendicular motion;  rather,  in  both  cases  we  must  take  account  of  two  motions, 
each  independent  of  the  other:  the  one  an  accelerated  vertical  motion  caused 
by  their  weight,  the  other  a  uniform  horizontal  motion  imparted  by  the  ship, 
a  motion  which,  through  the  principle  of  inertia,  they  continue  to  share  with 
the  ship  even  though  physically  separated  from  it.  The  result  is  that  both  ball 
and  arrow  actually  describe  a  parabolic  curve. ^  As  to  the  fact  that  this  par- 
abolic trajectory  is  not  discernible  to  an  observer  on  the  ship,  that  the  b2Jl  and 
arrow  appear  to  fadl  vertically,  this  is  because  the  observer  shares  in  common 
with  the  bzdl  and  the  arrow  the  horizontal  motion  imparted  to  them  by  the 
ship.  Thus  it  is  only  the  perpendiculzir  motion  peculiar  to  the  ball  and  the  arrow 
that  he  perceives. ^^ 

Now  it  would  seem  that  a  dispute  over  the  behaviour  of  falling  bodies  aboard 
a  moving  vessel  could  be  resolved  with  little  difficulty  through  boarding  a  ship 
and  conducting  the  appropriate  experiments.  And  in  the  Dialogue  the  question 
of  experiments  is  indeed  raised.  What  emerges,  however,  is  the  remarkable 
fact  that  no  one  had  bothered  to  perform  any.  The  Aristotelian  spokesman, 
Simplicio,  is  quite  sure  that  supporters  of  the  Aristotelian  position  must  have 
performed  experiments,  but  he  cannot  vouch  for  it;  Salviati  (Galileo)  can.  He 
is  quite  certain  that  they  performed  none,  because  had  they  done  so  they  would 
have  discovered  that  their  hypotheses  were  inv2ilid.^  Moreover,  Salviati  in- 
sists, no  experiment  is  in  fact  needed,  since  the  result  is  already  certain. ^^  And 
it  is  in  this  context  that  Gassendi  enters  the  picture.  For  the  two  letters  which 
comprise  his  DeMotu  Impresso  a  Motore  Translato  (Paris,  1642)  consist  of  detailed 
reports  to  his  Provengal  friend  Pierre  du  Puy  of  experiments  which  he  con- 
ducted in  1640  in  the  harbour  at  Marseilles  in  the  company  of  the  Governor 
of  Provence,  Louis  Emanuel  de  Valois,  Comte  d'Alais,  experiments  expressly 
designed  to  test  Galileo's  proposition  that  "if  the  body  we  are  on  is  in  motion, 
then  all  our  movements,  as  well  as  that  of  those  we  set  in  motion,  take  place, 
and  appear  to  take  place,  just  as  if  that  body  were  stationary. "^'^  And  to  com- 
plement his  report  Gassendi  supplies  a  close  analysis  of  relevant  passages  from 
Galileo's  works,  particularly  the  Two  New  Sciences. 

The  experiments  themselves,  which  range  from  dropping  balls  from  the  top 
of  the  mast  to  throwing  objects  in  different  directions  across  and  along  the  deck, 
are  recorded  with  a  clear  pride  on  Gassendi's  part  at  being  the  first  to  perform 
them.*^  As  for  his  analysis  and  commentary,  Gassendi  displays  a  thorough 
understanding  of  Galileo's  arguments  and  a  clear  grasp  of  their  implications 
for  the  physical  objections  to  the  earth's  motion.  What  raises  the  DeMotu,  how- 
ever, above  the  level  of  an  enthusiastic  and  competent  commentary  on  Galileo 


226  GASSENDl's  DEFENSE  OF  GALILEO 

is  the  fact  that  Gassendi  brings  to  bear  upon  the  question  of  inertia,  which 
in  GaHleo's  formulation  is  restricted  to  the  case  of  a  body  following  at  uniform 
rate  a  circular  path  concentric  with  the  earth's  circumference,  two  considera- 
tions which  enable  him  to  break  away  from  the  notion  of  circularity  and  offer 
the  first  published  announcement  of  the  law  of  inertia  in  its  classical  formu- 
lation.^^ The  first,  in  which  we  may  observe  the  influence  of  Gilbert  and  Kep- 
ler, is  his  recognition  of  "gravity"  as  a  force  of  attraction  acting  on  a  body 
externally,  rather  than  a  property  of  the  body  itself,  as  Galileo  held.  The  sec- 
ond, which  derives  from  his  attachment  to  the  Epicurean  concept  of  void,  is 
his  ability  to  conceive  of  bodies  existing  in  "imaginary  spaces"  beyond  the  sphere 
of  the  earth's  attractive  force.  ^  "You  may  enquire",  he  says,  "what  would  hap- 
pen to  that  stone  which  I  have  asserted  can  be  imagined  in  those  empty  spaces 
if  it  were  roused  from  a  state  of  rest  and  impelled  by  some  force.  My  reply 
is  that  it  would  doubtless  move  indefinitely  at  a  uniform  rate,  slowly  or  quickly, 
to  the  degree  that  the  force  impressed  upon  it  is  great  or  small". ^^ 

In  this  particular,  then,  the  DeMotu  is  not  without  importance  in  the  history 
of  physics,  even  though  it  was  left  to  the  genius  of  Newton,  who  was  born  in 
the  year  of  its  publication,  and  the  year  of  Galileo's  death,  to  apply  this  prin- 
ciple of  inertia  to  the  celesti2d  as  well  as  the  terrestrial  sphere  and  establish 
it  as  one  of  the  cornerstones  of  classical  science.  We  must  stay,  however,  with 
the  immediate  context,  that  is,  the  debate  over  the  Copernican  system,  and 
consider  the  impact  of  the  De  Motu  and  the  difficulties  which  faced  the  author 
in  treating  a  theory  which  was  under  official  condemnation  by  the  Church.^ 
There  is  no  doubting  that  privately  Gassendi  was  a  dedicated  Copernican  and 
that  the  DeMotu  was  meant  as  a  contribution  to  the  Copernican  cause.  As  early 
as  1625  Gassendi  had  written  to  Galileo  declaring  his  complete  acceptance  of 
the  Copernican  system,  and  subsequent  letters  to  Peiresc  and  others  offer  ample 
confirmation.^^  At  the  same  time  Gassendi  was  not  unaware  that  he  was  in 
a  delicate  position,  that  there  were  those,  particularly  among  the  Aristotelians, 
who  would  be  quick  to  act  upon  any  indication  that  he  was  taking  the  Co- 
pernican part.  The  publication  of  the  first  book  of  his  Exercitationes  Paradoxicae 
adversus  Aristoteleos  (1624)  had  "come  close  to  causing  a  tragedy,"  as  he  told 
Schickard,  and  his  decision  to  suppress  the  remaining  books  may  be  not  un- 
connected with  the  condemnation  at  Paris  in  the  same  year  of  Jean  Bitaud, 
Antoine  Villon,  and  Etienne  de  Clave  for  publishing  theses  contrary  to  the 
teachings  of  Aristotle. ^^  And  the  case  of  Galileo  too  had  taught  Gassendi  the 
value  of  discretion.  At  the  end  of  1633,  six  months  after  Galileo's  sentence, 
he  informed  Peiresc  of  his  intention  to  write  to  Galileo. ^^  Peiresc  promised  to 
arrange  for  the  letter  to  be  delivered,  but  cautioned  Gassendi  to  couch  his  sen- 
timents in  very  general  terms. ^^  Gassendi  sent  the  letter  to  Peiresc  who  had 
a  copy  forwarded  to  Galileo,  but  "with  the  omission  of  three  lines"  which  he 
judged  better  excluded.^*  Gassendi  was  not  alone  in  feeling  the  demands  of 
prudence.  At  almost  precisely  the  same  time  Descartes  was  writing  to  Mer- 


HOWARD  JONES  227 

senne  with  reference  to  the  GaHleo  affair  and  announcing  that  in  order  to  pre- 
serve a  tranquil  life  he  was  abandoning  his  work  on  cosmology  altogether  and 
following  Ovid's  very  Epicurean  motto  "bene  vixit  qui  bene  latuit."^^  And  to 
add  one  further  instance,  in  the  autumn  of  1635  Descartes  wrote  to  Mersenne 
expressing  his  "astonishment"  that  Mersenne  was  considering  writing  a  ref- 
utation of  a  recent  book  against  the  motion  of  the  earth,  but  adding  that  he 
trusted  in  Mersenne's  "prudence. "^^  We  have  Descartes'  copy  of  the  letter. 
Mersenne's  "prudence"  prompted  him  to  destroy  his. 

It  is  clear,  then,  that  although  almost  ten  years  had  elapsed  since  formal 
sentence  was  passed  on  Galileo,  any  open  avowal  of  support  for  the  earth's 
motion  on  Gassendi's  part  would  have  been  ill-advised  and  possibly  danger- 
ous. Accordingly,  at  the  close  of  the  second  letter  he  took  pains  to  make  two 
points  clear.  First,  his  intention  in  rehearsing  the  arguments  in  support  of  the 
earth's  motion  was  not  at  all  to  promote  the  Copernican  theory  — quite  the  re- 
verse; it  was  to  be  of  some  service  to  its  opponents  by  demonstrating  that  the 
arguments  upon  which  they  relied,  ingenious  as  some  of  them  were,  did  not 
stand  up  to  examination,  and  stronger  arguments  were  needed.^''  Second, 
while  the  Copernicans  argued  that  Scriptural  passages  which  state  that  the  earth 
is  stationary  and  that  the  sun  moves  are  not  to  be  taken  literally  but  regarded 
as  "adapted  to  common  ways  of  speaking,"  and  here  he  is  clearly  alluding  to 
Galileo's  celebrated  Letter  to  the  Grand  Duchess  Christina  (1615),  Gassendi  divorced 
himself  entirely  from  them  and  in  this  instance  submitted  to  the  authority  of 
the  Church. 2^ 

If  Gassendi  imagined  that  these  closing  statements  were  going  to  be  suffi- 
cient to  dispel  misgivings  about  the  work  he  quickly  learned  otherwise.  Re- 
action was  swift,  angry,  and  predictable.  Within  months  Jean-Baptiste  Morin, 
indefatigable  crusader  for  a  fixed  earth,  issued  forth  with  his  Alae  Telluris  frac- 
tae^  a  vigorous  denunciation  of  the  De  Motu  exploiting  all  the  robustness  of  the 
Latin  language. ^^  Morin's  grievance  was  a  double  one.  Firstly,  he  was  certain 
that  despite  his  disclaimers  Gassendi  had  assumed  the  mantle  of  Galileo  in  a 
conscious  attempt  to  promote  the  Copernican  theory.  Secondly,  he  was  quite 
convinced  that,  although  Gassendi  had  mentioned  his  name  only  in  passing, 
it  was  his  own  Famosi  et  antiqui problematis  de  telluris  motu,  vel  quiete  solutio  (Paris, 
1631)  that  Gassendi  had  in  mind  when  he  maintained  that  current  arguments 
for  the  earth's  stability  did  not  hold  water.  Whatever  Gassendi  thought  of  the 
merits  of  Morin's  arguments,  which  were  drawn  largely  from  his  earlier  Sol- 
utio, he  was  clearly  stung  by  Morin's  charge  that  he  had  deliberately  attemp- 
ted to  subvert  the  authority  of  the  Church.  Accordingly,  he  issued  a  rejoinder 
in  the  form  of  a  letter  to  his  long-time  friend  Joseph  Gaultier  in  which,  in  ad- 
dition to  countering  Morin's  arguments  based  upon  the  phenomenon  of  the 
tides  and  the  behaviour  of  falling  bodies,  he  offered  a  strenuous  re-affirmation 
of  the  De  Motu's  true  intention. ^^ 

This  altercation  over  the  De  Motu  initiated  a  long  and  increasingly  bitter 


228  •  GASSENDl's  DEFENSE  OF  GALILEO 

Struggle  between  Gassendi  and  Morin,  but  one  that  shifted  onto  other  ground.^' 
In  the  meantime,  the  De  Motu  came  under  attack  from  another  source,  the  Rec- 
tor of  the  Jesuit  College  at  Metz,  Pierre  Cazree.  Cazree  wrote  to  Gassendi  in 
November  of  1642  protesting  what  seemed  to  him  to  be  Gassendi's  support  for 
the  Copernican  theory  and  criticising  Gassendi  for  endorsing  Gadileo's  demon- 
strations concerning  falling  bodies  in  the  Two  New  Sciences,  demonstrations  which 
Cazree  thought  erroneous.  Gassendi  replied  a  month  later  merely  arguing  in 
support  of  his  own  conception  of  "gravity"  as  an  external  attractive  force.  Cazree 
was  not  to  be  put  off  with  this  brief  and  evasive  reply  and  early  in  1645  pub- 
lished at  Paris  his  Physica  Disquisitio,  a  full-scale  criticism  of  the  Two  New  Sciences 
and  an  open  attack  upon  Gassendi's  exposition  of  Galileo's  arguments. ^^  In 
March  of  1645  Gassendi  sent  Cazree  a  response  in  which  he  treated  the  ques- 
tion of  the  acceleration  of  falling  bodies  in  some  detail  as  part  of  a  vigorous  de- 
fence of  Galileo's  proposition  that  "the  distances  travelled,  during  equal  intervals 
of  time,  by  a  body  falling  from  rest,  stand  to  one  another  in  the  same  ratio  as 
the  odd  numbers  beginning  with  unity. "^  In  May  Cazree  replied  with  his  Vin- 
diciae  demonstrationis  physicae,  and  in  the  following  month  Gassendi  sent  a  rejoinder 
in  which  he  admitted  to  certain  errors  in  the  De  Motu  and  in  his  first  letter,  but 
stoutly  maintained  the  Galilean  position. ^"^  The  debate  is  free  of  the  personal 
abuse  which  characterised  the  altercation  between  Gassendi  and  Morin.  Cazree 
is  not  driven  by  Morin's  fanatical  zeal  but  by  a  genuine  concern  for  scientific 
truth  which  Gassendi  can  respect.  Yet  the  differences  between  Gassendi  and 
Cazree  are  sharp  and  bring  into  clear  focus  the  intensity  of  the  battle  between 
the  old  and  the  new  physics. 

In  conclusion  consideration  needs  to  be  given  to  certain  passages  in  the  doc- 
uments outlined  above  which  touch  not  upon  specific  scientific  arguments  but 
upon  the  issue  alluded  to  earlier,  that  is,  the  relationship  between  science  and 
religion,  between  reason  and  faith.  Gassendi's  first  pronouncements  on  the  ques- 
tion came  early  in  his  career  in  the  Exercitationes  Paradoxicae  adversus  Aristoteleos , 
the  first  book  of  which  was  published  in  1624,  a  work  in  which  the  freedom 
to  philosophise  is  a  central  issue.  For  one  of  the  severest  criticisms  he  makes 
of  the  Aristotelians  is  that  they  have  made  themselves,  and  would  make  oth- 
ers, slaves  to  the  Master. ^^  Another  is  that  they  have  done  philosophy  a  dis- 
service by  blurring  the  distinction  between  it  and  theology  by  assuming  the 
right  as  philosophers  to  pronounce  on  questions  which  are  the  province  of  the 
theologians.  And  this  principle  of  observing  a  proper  distinction  between  the 
spheres  of  philosophy  and  theology  is  one  which  Gassendi  repeats  in  a  1629 
letter  to  Thomas  Feyens,  Professor  of  Medicine  at  Louvain,  in  his  Examen  Flud- 
danae  Philosophiae  (1629),  and  again  in  the  opening  section  of  his  Disquisitio  Meta- 
physica  (1642),  where  he  tells  Descartes  that  he  is  not  prepared  to  debate  with 
him  the  substance  of  his  Meditations,  this  being  a  matter  of  faith,  but  only  his 
method  and  argumentation.^^  But,  however  much  Gassendi  might  hope  for 
scientist  and  theologian  ailike  to  restrict  his  activity  to  his  own  respective  sphere, 
each  acknowledging  the  authority  of  the  other,  he  recognises  that  there  may 


HOWARD  JONES  229 

arise  instances  where  science  and  religion  come  into  conflict,  where  the  sci- 
entist is  led  by  reason  or  experience  to  hold  as  true  a  proposition  which  contra- 
dicts the  teaching  of  the  Church.  Here  too  his  position  is  clear.  Reason  must 
give  way  to  faith.  As  he  declares  in  the  same  letter  to  Feyens,  "where  religion 
has  prescribed  something  it  is  rashness,  even  madness,  to  so  much  as  mutter 
anything  to  the  contrary. "^^  Gassendi  subscribes,  in  short,  to  the  doctrine  of 
"double  truth."^^ 

However,  if  Gassendi  found  himself  comfortable  with  this  doctrine  in  1629 
it  was  perhaps  because  he  could  consider  it  in  the  abstract.  In  1642  the  case 
was  different.  The  hypothetical  scientist  had  become  Gassendi  himself,  and 
in  the  same  two  places  where  he  records  his  obedience  to  the  authority  of  the 
Church  he  adds  certain  comments  concerning  the  1633  decree  against  Galileo 
which  come  close  to  challenging  its  validity.  Firstly,  he  claims  that  he  is  un- 
aware that  the  Copernican  theory  had  been  held  suspect  prior  to  the  proceed- 
ings against  Galileo,  but  that  to  the  contrary  it  had  been  commended  by  a 
number  of  persons  of  standing  in  the  Church  hierarchy. '^^  Secondly,  with  re- 
spect to  the  decree  itself  it  is  his  understanding,  in  the  absence  of  all  but  hear- 
say evidence  to  the  contrary,  that  it  applied  only  to  Galileo  himself,  for  reasons 
peculiar  to  his  case  and  not  applicable  to  others.*^  Finally,  since  the  sentence 
against  Galileo  was  passed  only  by  the  Congregation  of  the  Holy  Office  and 
had  not  been  ratified  by  the  Pope  ex  cathedra,  or  even  by  Ecumenical  Council, 
denial  of  the  Copernican  theory  cannot  be  regarded  as  an  article  of  faith. '^^ 
If  these  declarations  have  a  ring  of  desperation,  it  is  the  desperation  of  the  sci- 
entist facing  his  dilemma  and  may  be  taken  as  sure  measure  of  the  extreme 
reluctance  with  which  in  this  instance  Gassendi  was  prepared  to  allow  the  light 
of  reason  to  be  extinguished  by  the  light  of  faith.  If  Gassendi  halted  at  the  fence 
and  resigned  himself  to  taking  the  safer  course,  it  was  perhaps  because  in  1642 
he  was  at  the  mid-point  of  what  was  his  real  life's  work,  the  rehabilitation  of 
the  pagan  philosophy  most  at  variance  with  Christian  teaching,  the  philos- 
ophy of  Epicurus.  There  would  be  other  chances  to  jump  the  fence.  But  that 
is  another  story. 

Since  we  are  gathered  in  Wolfenbiittel,  let  me  conclude  by  referring  to  a 
document  which  is  housed  in  this  celebrated  Herzog  August  Bibliothek.  It  is 
a  folio  from  an  Omnibus  collection  showing  an  anonymous  seventeenth-century 
engraving  of  a  contemporary  scholar  whose  lips  are  padlocked  shut.  The  scho- 
lar bears  a  striking  resemblance  to  Galileo.  The  engraving  carries  the  follow- 
ing subscription: 

Wer  hie  will  leben  und  recht  und  Schon, 
Und  seinem  nutz  mit  rath  nach  gehn: 
Der  muss  die  drei  Stiicklein  halten  fein, 
2ils  sehen  und  horen  drob  still  sein.*^ 

McMaster  University 


230  GASSENDI  S  DEFENSE  OF  GALILEO 

Notes 


1.  A.  Koestler,  The  Sleepwalkers  (London:  Penguin  Books,  rep.  1984),  p.  194.  See 
also  A.  R.  Hall,  The  Scientific  Revolution  (Boston,  1954),  p.  55  and  Dorothy  Stimson, 
The  Gradual  Acceptance  of  the  Copernican  Hypothesis  (New  York,  1917). 

2.  For  a  translation  of  the  full  text  of  Osiander's  Preface,  see  E.  Rosen,  Three  Co- 
pernican Treatises  (Columbia,  1939),  p.  24  ff.  See  also  Osiander's  letter  to  Rheticus,  20 
April,  1541  in  Kepler's  ^/?o/o^m  Tychonis  contra  f/r^um  (Kepler,  Opera  Omnia,  ed.  Frisch, 
1:236-76). 

3.  I.  Bernard  Cohen,  The  Birth  of  a  New  Physics  (New  York,  1960),  p.  87. 

4.  Aristotle,  De  Caelo  1:7;  Ptolemy,  Almagest  1:7. 

5.  For  a  popular  expression  of  such  arguments  see  the  apposite  verses  in  Guillamme 
de  Bartas,  La  semaine,  ou  creation  du  Monde  (Paris,  1578). 

6.  E.  A.  Burtt,  The  Metaphysical  Foundations  of  Modern  Science  (1924;  reprint  ed.,  New 
York,  1954),  p.  38. 

7.  Dialogue,  pp.  106-254  (Second  Day).  For  a  full  treatment  of  these  aspects  of  Ga- 
lileo's work,  see  A.  Koyre,  Etudes  Galileennes  (Paris,  1939-1940);  S.  Drake,  Galileo  Stu- 
dies (Ann  Arbor,  1970),  esp.  pp.  214-78. 

8.  Dialogue,  p.  126. 

9.  Dialogue,  pp.  144-45. 

10.  Dialogue,  pp.  147-49.  Cf.  Two  New  Sciences,  translated  by  Henry  Crew  and  Al- 
fonso de  Salvio  (New  York:  Dover,  rep.  1954),  p.  244  ff. 

11.  Dialogue,  p.  248  ff. 

12.  Dialogue,  p.  144. 

13.  Dialogue,  p.  145. 

14.  "Si  id  corpus,  cui  insistimus,  transferatur,  omneis  nostros,  rerumque  a  nobis  mo- 
bilium  perinde  fieri,  apparereque,  ac  si  illud  quiesceret"  — /«?^n  Gassendi  Opera  omnia  in 
sex  tomos  divisa  (Lyons:  L.  Anisson/J.  B.  Devenet,  1658),  3,  478  A.  The  two  letters  are 
dated  November  20,  1640  and  December  11,  1640. 

15.  Whether  Gassendi  was  indeed  the  first  to  carry  out  the  experiment  of  dropping 
a  ball  from  the  ship's  mast  is  a  moot  point.  Thomas  Digges  refers  to  such  an  exper- 
iment in  his  A  Perfit  Description  of  the  Caelestiall  Orbes  according  to  the  most  aunciente  doctrine 
of  the  Pythagoreans,  latelye  revived  by  Copernicus  and  by  Geometricall  Demonstrations  approved, 
which  was  added  as  a  supplement  to  the  1576  edition  of  Leonard  Digges's  A  Prognos- 
tication everlas tinge  of  righte  good  effecte. 

16.  Credit  for  the  first  actual  formulation  of  the  law  of  inertia  is  to  be  given  to  De- 
scartes. Although  he  published  the  law  for  the  first  time  in  1644  in  the  Principes  de  Phi- 
losophic, Part  2,  section  37  {Oeuvres,  vol.  9.2.84),  it  was  announced  in  Le Monde  ou  Traite 
de  la  lumiere  {Oeuvres,  9:38)  which  had  circulated  in  manuscript  since  1633. 

17.  m.  491  A-495  B. 

18.  in.  495  B.  On  Gassendi's  role  in  the  formulation  of  the  law  of  inertia,  see  the 
following:  P.  A.  Pav,  "Gassendi's  Statement  of  the  Principle  of  Inertia,"  Isis  57  (1966): 
24-34;  J.  T.  Clark,  S.  J.,  "Pierre  Gassendi  and  the  Physics  of  GalUeo,"  Isis  54  (1963): 
352-70;  A.  Koyre,  op.  cit.,  pp.  244-51;  B.  Rochot,  "Beeckmann,  Gassendi  et  le  prin- 
cipe  d'inertie,"  Archives  Internationales  d'histoire  des  sciences  31  (1952):  282-89. 

19.  The  Copernican  hypothesis  was  formally  condemned  by  decree  of  the  Congre- 
gation of  the  Index  in  1616,  and  was  affirmed  in  the  sentence  of  the  Holy  Office  against 
Galileo  in  1633. 


HOWARD  JONES  23I 

20.  20  July,  1625,  Gassendi  to  Galileo  (Gassendi,  Opera  Omnia,  VI.  4  B);  26  Feb- 
ruary, 1632,  Gassendi  to  Peiresc  {Lettres  de  Peiresc,  ed.  Ph.  Tamizey  de  Larroque  (Paris, 
1888-1898),  IV.  259;  cf.  Gassendi  to  Peiresc,  21  July,  1629  {Lettres  de  Peiresc,  IV.  202; 
Gassendi  to  Campanella,  10  May,  1633  (IV.  56  B);  Gassendi  to  Hortensius,  13  Au- 
gust, 1633  (VI.  64  B  -  65  A). 

21.  August  27,  1630,  Gassendi  to  Schickard,  (VI.  35  B). 

22.  28  December,  1633,  Gassendi  to  Peiresc  {Lettres  de  Peiresc,  IV.  404). 

23.  5  January,  1634,  Peiresc  to  Gassendi  {Lettres  de  Peiresc,  IV.  410). 

24.  1  February,  1634,  Peiresc  to  Gassendi  {Lettres  de  Peiresc,  IV.  428-29). 

25.  January  10,  1634,  Descartes  to  Mersenne  {Oeuvres  de  Descartes,  ed.  Ch.  Adam 
and  Paul  Tannery,  12  vols.  [Paris  1879-1910],  1:285-86). 

26.  Autumn,  1635,  Descartes  to  Mersenne  {Oeuvres,  1:324). 

27.  III.  591  A. 

28.  III.  519  A-B. 

29.  Alae  Tellurisfractae,  cumphysica  demonstratione  quod  opinio  Copernicana  de  Telluris  motu 
sit  falsa:  et  novo  conceptu  de  Oceanijluxu  et  reflexu.  Adversus  P.  Gassendi  .  .  .  libellum  de  motu 
impresso  a  motore  translato  (Paris,  1643). 

30.  This  third  letter  was  published  separately  at  Lyon  in  1649  under  the  title  Apologia 
in  Jo.  Bap.  Morini  librum  cui  titulus  Alae  Telluris  Fractae.  In  the  1658  Opera  Omnia  the  two 
letters  to  du  Puy  and  the  letter  to  Gaultier  are  printed  together  as  Epistolae  tres  de  Motu 
Impresso  .  .  .  (III.  478-563). 

31.  In  1650  Morin  published  at  Paris  his  Dissertatio  de  Atomis  et  Vacuo  contra  P.  Gas- 
sendi Philosophiam  Epicuri,  an  attack  upon  Gassendi's  promotion  of  Epicurean  physics. 
In  1653  Gassendi's  pupil  Fr.  Bernier  answered  with  Favilla  ridiculi  muris,  hoc  est,  Dis- 
sertatiunculae  ridicule  defensae  a  J.  B.  M.  adversus  expositam  a  P.  Gassendo  Epicuri  Philosoph- 
iam. In  the  following  year,  writing  under  the  pseudonym  "Panurgus,"  Morin  countered 
with  V.  Panurgi  Epistola  de  Tribus  Impostoribus  [Gassendi,  Bernier,  Neure],  and  in  1657, 
two  years  after  Gassendi's  death,  published  in  his  own  namey.  B.  Morini  .  .  .  defensio 
suae  dissertationis  de  Atomis  et  Vacuo;  adversus  P.  Gassendi  Philosophiam  Epicuream.  Contra  F. 
Bernerii  Anatomiam  ridiculi  muris. 

32.  Physica  demonstratio  qua  ratio,  mensura,  modus  ac  potentia  accelerationis  motus  in  naturali 
descensu  gravium  determinantur,  adversus  nuper  excogitatam  a  Galileo  Galilaei  Florentino  philo- 
sopho  ac  mathematico  de  eodem  motu  pseudoscientiam.  Ad  clarissimum  virum  Petrum  Gassendum 
Cathedralis  Ecclesiae  diniensis  praepositum  dignissimum  (Paris:  J.  du  Brueil,  1645). 

33.  Two  New  Sciences  (Crew  /  de  Salvio,  p.  52). 

34.  Vindiciae  demonstrationis  physicae  de  proportione  qua  gravia  decidentia  accelerantur.  Ad  clarissi- 
mum D.  Petrum  Gassendum  .  .  .  (Paris:  G.  Leblanc,  1645).  Gassendi's  three  letters  were 
published  together  at  Paris  in  1646  as  De  proportione  qua  gravia  decidentia  accelerantur:  Epistolae 
tres  quibus  ad  totidem  epistolas  R.  P.  Cazraei,  Societatis  lesu,  respondetur.  They  are  printed  together 
in  the  Opera  Omnia  (III.  564  A  -  650  B),  but  with  the  first  letter  printed  in  last  place. 

35.  See  Jones,  H.,  Pierre  Gassendi,  ] 592-] 635:  An  Intellectual  Biography  (Nieuwkoop: 
De  Graaf,  1981)  p.  96  ff. 

36.  III.  108  B. 

37.  June  6,  1629,  Gassendi  to  Feyens  (VI.  17  B);  Examen  Fluddanae  Philosophiae ,  III. 
231  B;  Disquisitio  Metaphysica,  III.  273  B. 

38.  VI.  17  A. 

39.  For  a  useful  discussion  of  the  doctrine  of  "double  truth"  in  Gassendi,  see  O.  R. 
Bloch,  La  Philosophie  de  Gassendi  (La  Haye,  1971),  p.  319-49;  in  gener2il,  see  E.  Gilson, 
"La  doctrine  de  la  double  verite"  in  Etudes  de  philosophie  m^dievale  (Strasbourg,  1921), 
p.  51-75. 


232  GASSENDl's  DEFENSE  OF  GALILEO 

40.  III.  641   B. 

41.  III.  641  B.  We  may  note  that  Gassendi  maintained  this  position  as  late  as  1654 
when  he  composed  his  Life  of  Copernicus;  cf.  V.  515  B. 

42.  III.  519  B.  We  have  noted  (above,  n.  25)  Descartes'  similar  reservations  on  this 
point. 

43.  Sammelband  24.1  Geom.  2°:  Herzog  August  Bibliothek,  Wolfenbiittel. 


Hermann  Mylius'  Baroque  Letters 
to  Milton  and  Weckherlin 

Leo  Miller 

Just  about  three  hundred  and  thirty-four  years  ago,  a  middle-aged 
middle-echelon  envoy  from  one  of  the  most  middling  of  provincial  Ger- 
man states  was  travelling  on  a  minor  diplomatic  mission  to  London. 
While  he  was  crossing  the  sea  towards  Margate  on  a  sailing  vessel,  his 
ship  was  caught  in  a  terrible  storm.  Even  veteran  and  sea-hardened  sailors 
of  the  crew  were  down  on  their  knees  praying  for  their  lives,  but  Hermann 
Mylius  saw  himself  dramatically  reenacting  the  role  of  Aeneas  in  the  first  book 
of  Vergil's  epic.  In  his  self-image  this  scholar-lawyer-diplomat  sustained  the 
part  of  a  protagonist  in  an  heroic  romance  of  the  Renaissance.  This  was  Her- 
mann Mylius,  deputy  and  roving  ambassador  for  the  Count  of  Oldenburg, 
whose  long-buried  diaries  and  letters  I  have  had  the  arduous  pleasure  of  res- 
cuing from  oblivion.^ 

The  ups-2ind-downs  of  his  negotiations  in  the  face  of  many  obstacles,  his 
meetings  with  John  Milton  and  others  of  prominence  in  England,  is  a  long 
story.  Today  let  us  consider  Hermann  Mylius  as  a  practitioner  of  baroque 
Neo-Latin  epistolography.  From  among  the  many  letters  which  he  composed, 
on  official  business  and  in  personal  correspondence,  we  select  two:  one  letter 
addressed  to  the  German-born  poet,  Georg  Rudolph  Weckherlin,  who  was  then 
long  settled  in  England,  and  one  letter  to  John  Milton.  Both  Weckherlin  and 
Milton  were  at  that  time  better  known  for  their  careers  in  the  office  of  foreign 
affairs  of  the  government  of  England. 

Georg  Rudolph  Weckherlin  grew  up  in  Germany,  but  emigrated  to  Eng- 
land during  the  Thirty  Years  War.  He  was  naturalized  as  a  British  subject, 
and  became  the  trusted  secretary  for  foreign  correspondence  during  the  reign 
of  Charles  I,  continuing  in  the  service  of  the  Long  Parliament,  till  1649.  My- 
lius first  met  Weckherlin  in  1638,  during  his  first  diplomatic  mission  to  Eng- 
land, and  they  became  good  friends.  When  Mylius  came  again  in  1651, 
Weckherlin  was  out  of  office,  having  been  dropped  by  the  Rump,  but  he  was 
still  on  good  personal  terms  with  many  of  his  former  colleagues.  He  welcomed 
Mylius  cordially  and  warmly  assisted  him  with  letters  of  introduction. 
For  various  reasons,  Mylius'  mission  was  delayed  and  dragged  on  from  Au- 


234  HERMANN   MYLIUS    BAROQUE  LETTERS 

gust  1651  to  March  1652.  In  December  of  1651,  under  the  impression  that 
Mylius  was  about  to  return  to  Germany,  Weckherlin  sent  him  a  gift  copy  of 
his  printed  poems,  together  with  a  letter,  which  unfortunately  is  not  now  known 
to  have  survived.  To  this  gift  Mylius  responded  with  the  letter  we  now  want 
to  examine,  not  by  the  textbook  rules  of  epistolary  rhetoric,  but  rather  by  those 
personal  and  individual  characteristics  —  and  idiosyncrasies  —  as  composed  by 
this  particular  literary  artist. 

Mylius'  Letter  to  Weckherlin,  December  1651 

Vena  tua,  verae  Veneris  plena,  vena  Venusini  in  responsoriis  ultimis 
ad  me  venit,  quid  ni  propria,  quae  hisce  rerum  revolutionibus 

-non  erubuit  sylvas  habitare 
gravis  et  suavis  ea  in  sacris  et  seriis,  etiam  salibus  et  aliis  talibus  docet 
et  delectat. 

Nee  legisse  semel  satis,  iuvat  usque  morari 
non  diffitebor  fastidia,  quae  pepererit  mihi,  haec  mora,  fere  semestris  sed 
delinificae  tuae  suadae  metricae  gratia  lecta,  et  relecta,  melius  intellecta, 
ilia  saepius  ita  temperavit,  ut  ruminando  &  rimando  maxime  divinas  istas 
versiones  psalmorum,  oblitus  taediorum,  composito  animo 
quem  Fors  dierum  cunque  dederit. 

Lucro  hie  collocaverit,  beatus  hoc  magnetismo,  qui  me  in  sui  amorem 
allexit  cui  etiam  immorari  et  immori,  cum  ad  altiora  et  superiora,  ubi 
aliquando  aeterna  sine  hora  &  mora  nostra  mansio,  deducat,  stat  sententia. 

Novam  quaeso  vitam  &  animam  inspires,  &  novo  habitu  induas,  ut 
in  theatrum  orbis  vicissim  prodeat  haec  tua  Thalia 

—  &  dapibus  supremi  digna  testudo  Jovis 

ad  quam  audiendam  &  invadendam  ego  et  alii  magis  accelerabunt,  quam 
Pastor  ad  ideas  Helena  veniente  carinas. 
Non  diutius  itaque  nos  languere  hoc  morbo  patiaris,  cui  praeter  te  Aes- 
culapius nullus  medebitur,  sed  hos  enixe  rogo,  ut  etiam  caetera  quae  in 
scriniis  privatis  latitant,  nobis  non  invideas,  haut  enim  latet  quod 

—  paulum  sepultae  distet  inertiae 
celata  virtus  — 

Non  ergo  diutius  celes  cam,  exerat  caput  nubibus,  et  nitore  suo  infucato 
et  germano  effulgeat,  &  si  placet  sine  cunctatione  quae  amantibus  inimi- 
ca,  qui  quod  volunt  cito  volunt,  et  ex  amore  natis  hisce  votis  et  vocibus 
meis  calidis  ignosces,  facies  spero,  et  si  feceris  tuo  nomini  et  precibus 
amicorum  satisfacies,  et  quod  caput  causae  est,  publici  boni  causa  facias, 
nosti  enim  quam  paucis  nostro  seculo  athlantibus  Germana  poesis  a  con- 
temptu  et  interitu  se  vindicaverit,  quae  priori  iacuit  et  tacuit,  annis  et 
pannis  obsita,  spreta  &  neglecta,  etiam  suis  annativis  civibus. 

Praematura  &  praepropera  tua  licet  pia  et  amica  in  abitum  meum  vota 
&  verba  accepi,  &  ex  iis  voluntatem  in  me  pronam,  et  enixam,  quam 


LEO   MILLER 


235 


reditum  meum  cupis,  liquido  satis  percepi:  Sed  mi  Weckerlingi  hie  haereo 
et  maereo,  et  meliora  spero,  sed  non  aspiro,  quo  volo,  nee  tamen  volunt, 
qui  clavum  in  puppi  regunt  volunt,  ut  desperem,  ideireo  sequar  quo  tra- 
hunt  donee  assequar,  et  videam  quid  tandem  de  hoc  eapite  statuerint 
Quirites,  si  spe  ceeidero,  magni  Aeneae  dextra  me  ceeidisse  iactabo. 

Deus  interim,  te  ocelle  fatum,  hoc  novo  imminenti  et  pluribus  sub- 
secuturis  tueatur  annis,  sospitem  imprimis  ab  otio  ille  molesto,  et  hos- 
pite,  qui  pedes  facit  imperare  non  caput  (Hcet  podagram  in  viris  magnis 
idem  esse  quod  fraenum  in  equo  indomito,  quidam  ex  priscis  dixerit)  cum 
omnibus  tuis,  et  ut  in  iis  singuHs  singula  gaudia  intuearis  ex  animo  foveo, 
quo  voto  fmio,  teque  cum  genero,  filia  et  familia  prolifica  cordicitus  saluto 

Totus  ore  et  opere  tuus. 

The  first  striking  feature  is  its  multiple  alliteration.  Mylius  loved  allitera- 
tion: vena  tua,  vera  Veneris  plena,  vera  Venusini,  using  the  metonymy  Venus  for 
verve,  and  referring  to  Horace  by  the  place  name  Venusinus,  carried  on  to  venit 
in  the  next  line.  These  alliterations  overlap  with  the  rhyming  final  a,  a  double 
rhyme  in  vena  and  plena.  Lower  down,  Mylius  employs  intertwined  alliteration 
and  rhyme  in  sacris  et  seriis,  preceded  by  rhyming  gravis  et  suavis,  followed  by 
three  syllable  rhyme  in  salibus  et  talibus,  closed  by  alliterating  docet  et  delectat. 

The  same  kind  of  multiple  play  of  vowels  and  consonants  rumbles  in  ru- 
minando  et  rimando.  In  the  preceding  line  there  crackles  another  variety  of  word 
play  by  repetition,  lecta,  relecta,  intellecta,  which  harks  back  to  delectat  above.  Still 
another  tonal  effect  is  heard  in  the  recurrence  of  a  musical  syllable  in  the  mid- 
dle of  a  word,  amorem  .  .  .  immorari  et  immori,  immediately  echoed  in  the  triple 
rhyme  altiora  et  superiora  and  soon  reverberating  in  hora  et  mora. 

This  pattern,  scintillating  to  the  eye  as  it  is  resonant  to  the  ear,  recurs  again 
in  iacuit  et  tacuit,  annis  et  pannis,  spreta  et  neglecta.  Mylius  was  intentionally  de- 
signing effects  that  should  dazzle.  He  may  have  gone  to  excess,  much  like  strobe 
lighting  in  some  modern  places  of  popular  entertainment,  but  for  registering 
upon  his  correspondent,  his  style  was  definitely  effective.  We  may  want  to  coin 
a  new  term  for  that  style:  Mylianismus. 

Another  conspicuous  aspect  of  Mylius'  artistry  is  a  practice  more  common 
in  Renaissance  letter  writing:  the  quotation  from  RomEin  classics,  without  iden- 
tification. Implied  is  the  compliment  that  the  cultured  correspondent-recipient 
will  recognize  its  source. 

The  first  here,  non  erubuit,  is  from  Vergil's  Second  Eclogue,  and  the  next  is  from 
the  Aeneid,  6:487,  with  the  word  vidisse  changed  to  legisse.  Mylius  often  mod- 
ifies a  quotation  to  suit  his  purpose  of  the  moment.  Sometimes  his  rendition 
is  quite  anomalous.  He  does  not  hesitate  to  twist  the  original  into  a  sense  not 
at  all  intended  by  the  ancient  author. 

The  third  and  fourth  quotations  are  from  the  Odes  of  Horace  (1 .9  and  1 .32). 
So  often  does  Mylius  cite  Horace  that  one  concludes  that  either  he  knew  many 


236  HERMANN   MYLIUS'  BAROQUE  LETTERS 

of  these  lyrics  by  heart  or  else  that  he  carried  a  volume  of  Q.  H.  Flaccus  with 
him  at  all  times. 

The  fifth  quotation  is  rather  more  taxing.  It  is  out  of  the  SUvcb  of  Publius 
Papinius  Statius  (1.2.214).  Mylius  may  have  had  it  in  memory  — we  all  retain 
odd  bits  of  verse  from  our  reading  — but  it  is  possible  that  when  Mylius  visited 
John  Dury,  who  was  then  keeper  of  the  so-called  King's  Library  at  St.  James, 
on  December  20,  he  may  have  used  the  occasion  to  poke  into  some  of  the  vol- 
umes there.  Of  course,  Statius  was  then  better  known  than  in  our  day.  Mil- 
ton's friend  Alexander  Gil  sent  a  gift  copy  of  Statius  to  an  appreciative  recipient, 
together  with  an  epigram,  published  in  his  Parerga  (1632). 

As  we  go  over  these  lines  you  have  also  recognized  classical  allusions  with- 
out direct  quotation.  Docet  et  delectat,  teach  and  delight,  recalls  the  goals  set  by 
Horace  in  his  Art  of  Poetry.  Thalia  and  Aesculapius  are  equally  obvious  refer- 
ences. "I  shall  boast  that  I  have  fallen  by  the  hand  of  great  Aeneas,"  is  another 
adaptation,  this  from  Aeneid  (10:830);  Mylius  identifies  both  with  the  words 
spoken  by  Aeneas,  and  with  Lausus  who  fell  by  Aeneas'  hand. 

Mylius  commonly  likes  to  give  vivid  concreteness  to  his  text  by  metaphor. 
The  statesmen  of  England  rule  the  rudder  in  the  stern,  an  image  especially 
apt  for  a  seafaring  power;  gout  is  like  a  bridle  on  an  untamed  horse,  he  says, 
leaving  us  to  fret  over  which  of  the  ancients  first  said  that.  The  mention  of 
magnetic  attraction  is  a  seventeenth-century  topical  allusion,  reflecting  what 
was  then  recent  scientific  knowledge.  William  Gilbert's  De  Magnete  came  out 
in  1600,  and  Milton  refers  to  magnetic  phenomena  both  in  prose  and  poetry 
(Of  Reformation,  Works,  Columbia  edition,  3:199;  Paradise  Lost,  3:583;  Paradise 
Regained,  2:168). 

Neo-Latin  was  notoriously  the  language  of  flattery,  and  Mylius  is  always 
lavish  in  his  compliments,  yet  compared  with  his  extravagance  in  some  other 
letters,  this  letter  may  be  judged  as  a  sincere  expression  of  sincere  apprecia- 
tion of  Weckherlin's  German  verses  by  a  man  who  was  as  patriotic  a  German 
as  was  possible  in  that  age  of  provincial  fragmentation. 

In  the  second  letter,  addressed  to  Milton,  we  have  a  real  treasure  for  epis- 
tolographical  analysis,  because  Mylius'  papers  preserve  two  preliminary  drafts 
and  a  final  revised  text  for  our  discussion. 

The  occasion  for  this  letter  arose  when  Milton  gave  Mylius  two  recently  pub- 
lished little  books  to  read  and  asked  for  his  opinion.  One  of  these  was  the  Pro 
Rege  et  Populo  Anglicano  Apologia  contra  Johannis  Polypragmatici  (alias  Miltoni  Angli) 
Defensionem  Destructivam  Regis  et  Populi  Anglicani ,  an  anonymous  political  attack 
on  Milton  the  regicide  by  a  royalist  partisan.  Its  real  author  was  one  John  Row- 
land, but  Milton  and  his  circle  erroneously  attributed  it  to  John  Bramhall,  some- 
time bishop  of  Derry.  The  other  booklet  was  just  off  the  press,  the  retort  to 
the  Pro  /?f^^  composed  by  Milton's  nephew  John  Phillips  and  corrected  for  Lat- 
inity  by  Milton  himself:  Responsio  ad Apologiam  Anonymi  Cujusdam  Tenebrionis  pro 
Rege  et  Populo  Anglicano  Infantissimam. 


LEO   MILLER  237 

Mylius  here  faced  two  problems.  To  complete  his  diplomatic  mission  he  ac- 
utely needed  Milton's  good  will  and  help,  and  the  favorable  opinion  of  the 
Commonwealth  grandees  with  whom  he  was  negotiating.  On  the  other  hand, 
as  deputy  for  a  prince  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire,  his  personal  principles  were 
in  favor  of  absolute  monarchy  and  a  state  church.  So  he  regularly  flattered 
the  Commonwealth  leaders  to  their  faces,  while  privately  he  held  the  Puritan 
sectaries  and  the  regicide  republicans  in  well-concealed  abhorrence.  His  own 
principles  were,  therefore,  in  agreement  with  the  Pro  Rege  booklet  against  Mil- 
ton, and  opposed  to  the  ideas  in  Phillips'  Responsio. 

Mylius  was  a  mature  and  experienced  diplomat.  He  handled  his  problem 
by  completely  avoiding  any  comment  at  all  on  Phillips'  Responsio  and  focusing 
his  letter  on  the  Pro  Rege's  personal  attacks  on  Milton.  He  drew  up  a  first  draft, 
and  let  it  lie  for  ten  days  before  composing  a  second. 

Mylius'  Letter  to  Milton,  January  1651/52,  Second  Draft 

Dulce  decus  meum,  mi  Miltoni 

Brammalium  Pragmaticum  procaci  et  protervo  stylo  insultantem  re- 
mittor Nihil  ad  causam,  nee  rhombum  tangit;  Forum  in  quo  se  exercet 
Lanista  impudentiae  ludus  est,  et  videtur  canino  studio  delectari.  Quod 
Hecuba  quaeritur 

Regina  olim,  nunc  servio 

Exul  deserta,  afflictissima  hominum 
hie  Briantis  filius.  Sed  qd  in  eum  peccauit,  aut  quem  interfecit  ex  suis 
Miltonius?  quis  eum  reti  et  falce  Mirmillonem  agere  coegit?  Sed  pler- 
orumque  oculi  cum  vesptilionibus  [sic\  in  ipso  meridie  caligant,  et  aures 
adeo  delicatae  st,  ut  nullibi  fere  tutum  sit  vera  loqui.  Retiarius  ille  in  et 
a  multis  desilit  tam  velox  infelix  satis,  ut  equus  a  iugo 

—  nam  solos  credit  habendos 

Esse  deos  quos  ipse  colit  — 
Sed  q  Lacon  ad  Lusciniam,  qdni  ad  ipsum?  Vox  est,  praeterea  nihil;  Ergo 

Men'  moveat  cimex  Pantilius,  aut  cruder  q 

Vellicet  absentem  Demetrius. 
Bachae  Bachanti  si  velis  adversarier. 
Ex  insana  insaniorem  facies,  feriet  saepius 
Tu  salveas. 

T.  T. 

This  second  draft  began  with  a  sharp  attack  on  the  supposed  author,  Bram- 
hall,  pilloried  with  three  alliterating  p's,  pragmaticum  procaci  et  protervo .  With  rather 
fewer  such  word  plays  than  in  his  letter  to  Weckherlin,  Mylius  multiplies  clas- 
sical allusions,  none  of  these  with  any  citation:  to  gladiatorial  combat,  rem- 
iniscences from  Cicero's  Philippics;  to  Hecuba;  to  the  nightingale,  proverbisdly 
a  voice  and  nothing  more  (this  Mylius  took  from  a  Latin  version  of  Plutarch's 


238  HERMANN   MYLIUS'  BAROQUE  LETTERS 

book,  Sayings  of  Spartans;  and  he  closes  with  two  Unes  from  the  Satires  of  Horace 
(1.10.78-79),  and  two  from  the  Amphitruo  of  Plautus  (2:704-5). 

Mylius  again  held  this  draft  up.  Into  his  rough  draft  diary  he  wrote  the  cau- 
tionary lines  from  Horace's  Art  of  Poetry  about  waiting  nine  years  and  polishing 
to  the  fmger  nail: 

Habe  mit  dem  schreiben  zuruck  gehalten,  memor  Venusini,  carmen 
reprehendendum,  — q  non 

Multa  dies  et  multa  litura  coercuit,  atque 

Perfectum  decies  non  castigavit  ad  unguem 

—  nonumque  prematur  in  annum. 
Schreibe  ihm  also  folgendes. 

Mylius'  Letter  to  Milton:  Third,  Final  Draft 

Amicissime  Miltoni, 

Miltiadis  et  Miltonii,  trophaea  odiosa  sunt  autori,  quem  remitto,  qui 
in  ludo  Impudentiae  se  impendio  exercet,  et  gloriosis  inimicitiis  incla- 
rescere  et  per  ruinam  alienae  existimationis  ad  famam  grassari  conatur. 
Quod  Haecuba  (regina  olim  nunc  servio)  idem  hie  Briantis  filius  que- 
ritur.  Sed  quid  in  eum  peccavit,  aut  quem  ex  suis  interfecit  Miltonius? 
quis  eum  reti  et  falce  Mirmillonem  agere  coegit?  quod  Lacon  ad  Lus- 
ciniam,  quis  non  ad  ipsum?  Vox  es,  praeterea  nihil;  Ergo 

Men'  moveat  cimex  Pantilius,  aut  crucior  quod 

vellicet  absentem  Demetrius 
Manus  inquinatas  habeat  necessum  est,  qui  cum  tam  vili  luto  ludere  in- 
stituit,  infame  enim  genus  bubonum  non  potest  officere  luminibus  Phoebi; 
Tu  salveas,  meae  expeditionis  memor,  quam  Augusti  Consilii  Censuram 
&  Parlamenti  approbationem  superasse,  et  iam  sub  malleo  et  manu  am- 
anuensis sudare  spero,  quod  si  verbo  dixeris  et  dederis,  reddam  tibi 

Totum  [M] 

In  this  fmal  text,  Mylius  starts  afresh.  The  too  obvious  flattery  of  dulce  decus 
meum  gives  way  to  the  more  informal  amicissime  Miltoni.  Mylius  drops  the  at- 
tack on  Bramhall.  He  has  realized  that  it  was  unwise  for  him  to  name  Bram- 
hall  or  otherwise  identify  the  Stuart  partisan.  It  was  one  thing  to  satisfy  Milton 
with  a  not-unjustified  comment  on  a  wretched  polemic.  It  was  quite  another 
to  involve  himself  personally  in  a  controversy  not  his  own.  Now  he  begins  with 
a  most  highly  complimenting  and  alliterating  allusion,  Miltiades  and  Milton, 
linking  the  defender  of  the  English  republic  with  the  Athenian  hero  of  Mar- 
athon. On  sound  second  thought  he  drops  a  number  of  other  allusions.  His 
previous  draft  had  picked  up  a  simile  from  Phillips'  Responsio  sneering  at  en- 
emies who  were  blind  as  bats:  that  would  have  been  painfully  tacdess  in  a  let- 
ter to  Milton,  on  the  verge  of  total  blindness.  He  dropped  the  lines  from  Plautus, 
which  said  that  if  you  beat  a  mad  Bacchante,  you  only  make  her  the  more 


LEO  MILLER 


239 


wild:  that  might  seem  to  suggest  unwisdom  in  PhiUips'  Responsio,  which  could 
be  expected  to  evoke  another  blast  against  Milton. 

For  those  of  us  who  enjoy  the  pursuit  of  the  abstruse  and  obscure,  we  may 
want  to  trace  Mylius'  phrase  about  practicing  in  the  school  of  impudence  to 
a  passage  in  the  Annales  of  Tacitus  (3:66),  about  the  praetor  and  senator  Ju- 
nius Otho  in  the  corrupt  times  of  Tiberius.  Tacitus  was  another  favorite  source 
of  Mylius  for  references.  The  series  of  challenging  questions  may  have  been 
intended  to  ring  a  memory  of  Juno's  tirade  against  the  Trojan  incursion  into 
Italy  in  the  tenth  book  of  the  Aeneid. 

But  still,  to  recall  us  to  a  sense  of  humility  as  we  contemplate  our  humanist 
predecessors  of  the  seventeenth  century  and  leave  us  with  incentives  to  study 
further,  this  letter  leaves  us  with  several  problems  unsolved.  We  know  who 
Hecuba  was,  how  she  saw  her  royal  husband  and  her  children  suffer  most  mis- 
erable fates,  herself  carried  off  into  slavery.  Mylius  seems  to  use  a  direct  quo- 
tation, which  should  be  easy  to  identify,  but  its  source  has  baffled  me.  What 
is  doubly  puzzling  is  that  it  could  be  easily  interpreted  as  a  poignant  allusion 
to  Queen  Henrietta  Maria,  exiled  widow  of  Charles  I. 

Another  mystery  is  why  Mylius  spells  the  name  of  Dryas,  father  of  that  Ly- 
kourgos,  King  of  Thrace,  who  strove  with  Dionysus,  with  a  B,  Brias,  although 
all  ancient  sources  spell  with  a  D,  Dryas.  Milton  seems  to  have  responded  to 
that  allusion  as  taken  from  the  //?W  (6: 130-40),  but  Milton  does  not  seem  to 
have  corrected  Mylius  on  the  spelling.^ 

In  this  final  draft,  the  letter  ends  with  a  reversion  to  our  now  f2imiliar  trope 
of  Mylianismus,  malleo  et  manu  amanuensis  .  .  .  sudare  spew  .  .  .  dixeris  et  dederis. 

In  his  day  Mylius  had  a  reputation  wherever  he  went  of  being  a  poet,  yet 
no  verses  from  his  hand  are  known  to  have  been  put  into  print  or  to  survive 
in  manuscript.  Letters  like  these  two,  and  others  like  them,  are  all  we  have 
to  go  by,  but  we  should  value  them,  in  all  their  floridity  and  affectation,  as 
the  legacy  of  an  obscure  and  casual  passerby  who  somehow  managed  to  pre- 
serve for  us  in  his  diary,  not  only  these  letters,  but  many  other  precious  mo- 
ments in  the  lives  of  two  better  known  names  in  poetry,  Georg  Rudolph 
Weckherlin  in  German,  John  Milton  in  English.  Whatever  else  he  may  have 
done  or  have  failed  to  do,  for  these  favors  Hermann  Mylius  deserves  his  little 
fragment  of  immortality. 

New  York  City 


240  HERMANN   MYLIUS    BAROQUE  LETTERS 

Notes 


1.  In  John  Milton  and  the  Oldenburg  Safeguard,  (New  York:  Loewenthal  Press  1985), 
I  have  published  the  full  account  of  Mylius'  peace  mission  and  his  observations  on  men 
and  affairs  in  the  English  Commonwealth  of  1651-1652,  including  the  texts  (with  trans- 
lations) of  all  significant  documents.  Additional  detail  on  Weckherlin  was  supplied  in 
"Milton  and  Weckherlin,"  Milton  Quarterly,  16  (1982):  1-3. 

The  manuscript  originals  of  the  texts  of  these  letters  are  preserved  in  the  Niedersach- 
sisches  Staatsarchiv,  Oldenburg,  Germany,  in  Acta  Grafschaft  Oldenburg,  Best.  20, 
Tit.  38,  Nr.  72,  Fasc.  13  (Concept)  ff  128-128v  and  214-215,  and  Fasc.  14  (Reinschrift), 
ff  85-85v  and  ff  98-99. 

2.  Milton,  who  was  often  at  odds  with  his  secretarial  colleagues  as  to  correct  classical 
Latinity,  on  occasion  signified  to  Mylius  his  feelings  about  Mylius'  laxity  in  that  area. 

Several  different  solutions  to  the  source  of  the  Hecuba  allusion  in  sundry  late- 
Renaissance  Latin  translations  of  Euripides'  drama  have  been  suggested  by  journal  re- 
viewers, none  quite  fitting  Mylius'  version. 


LITERATURE 


PLENARY       LECTURE 


Linguaggio,  poesia  e  "maraviglia" 
negli  scritti  di  Francesco  Patrizi 

Cesare  Vasoli 


I. 

Soprattutto  nel  corso  degli  ultimi  vent'anni,  Francesco  Patrizi  e  stato 
particolarmente  studiato  dagli  storici  della  cultura  cinquecentesca,  at- 
tratti  dalla  complessita  di  una  lunga  esperienza  filosofica  e  letteraria 
che  interesso  i  piij  diver  si  "domini"  della  vita  intellettuade  del  tempo,  dalla 
discussione  metafisica  alle  teorie  cosmologiche,  dalla  dottrina  del  linguaggio 
e  della  poesia  alle  proposte  politiche,  dall'intervento  in  problemi  di  squisita  na- 
tura  "tecnica"  alia  critica  della  conoscenza  storica.^  Ne  — com'e  naturale  — 
sono  stati  dimenticati  i  suoi  evidenti  legami  con  la  tradizione  neoplatonica  ed 
ermetica,^  la  sua  lunga  ed  insistente  polemica  antiaristotelica  che  lo  pone  tra 
i  maggiori  "novatores"  del  suo  secolo  e,  infme,  il  suo  atteggiamento  nei  con- 
fronti  della  stessa  "auctoritas"  ecclesiale  che  lo  indusse,  nella  Nova  de  universis 
philosophia,  a  proporre  come  soluzione  della  crisi  religiosa  e  filosofica,  una  dot- 
trina fondata  sui  testi  del  Trismegisto,  di  Platone,  di  Plotino  e  di  Proclo.  Da 
queste  ricerche,  che  tuttora  si  continuano,  sono  gia  venuti  risultati  assai  im- 
portanti,  soprattutto  per  quanto  concerne  la  straordinaria  impresa  delle  Dis- 
cussiones  peripateticae,  esempio  di  lucida  erudizione  e  di  strenuo  esercizio  filologico 
posti  al  servizio  di  una  critica  sottile  ed  implacabile  che  coin  vol  ge  tutti  i  fon- 
damenti  del  sapere  "tradizionale"  del  suo  tempo.  Ma  aJtre  indagini,  rivolte, 
piuttosto,  alia  compiuta  ricostruzione  del  testo  della  sua  Poetica  ed  all'indivi- 
duazione  del  suo  significato  teorico  e  storico,  hanno  posto  in  pieno  rilievo  lo 
stretto  nesso  che  unisce  la  sua  dottrina  neoplatonica  ed  ermetica  ad  una  con- 
cezione  del  linguaggio  e  della  poesia,  sempre  piu  elaborata  ed  approfondita, 
nel  corso  di  trent'anni,  particolarmente  vicina  alia  sensibilita  estetica  "manie- 
ristica"  e,  nondimeno,  inseparabile  da  un'ispirazione  filosofico-religiosa  assai 
contrastante  con  i  canoni  "magisteriali"  della  Controriforma.^  Come  si  sa,  I'iti- 
nerario  intellettuale  del  filosofo  di  Cherso  si  concluse  con  la  condanna  all'In- 
dice  della  Nova  de  universis  philosophia,  un'  opera  la  cui  inevitabile  ambiguita 
non  sfuggi  ai  censori  del  Sant'Uffizio,  ben  capaci  d'individuare  Taffettivo  ca- 
rattere  "eversivo"  della  sue  dottrine  metafisiche,  cosmologiche  e  —  se  si  vuole  — 


244  LINGUAGGIO,    POESIA   E  MARAVIGLIA 

persino  teologiche.'^  Essi  compresero  che  raffermazione  di  una  naturale  con- 
vergenza  tra  ermetismo,  platonismo  e  "vera"  dottrina  cattolica  sottintendeva, 
in  ogni  caso,  una  netta  distinzione  di  livelli  della  medesima  verita  "riposta" 
che  solo  i  dotti  potevano  intendere  nella  sua  perenne  purezza,  liberandola  dagli 
"infingimenti"  necessari  per  chi  doveva,  invece,  somministrarla  al  "volgo,"  sotto 
forma  di  "legge"  e  di  "disciplina"  politica.  Forse  intesero  anche  un  altro  aspetto 
della  dottrina  del  Patrizi  non  meno  radicale;  e,  cioe,  che  la  sua  dottrina  del 
linguaggio  e  della  parola  poetica  come  "fonti"  del  "maraviglioso"  e  del  "su- 
blime" mirava  a  stabilire  una  diversa  gerarchia  del  "sapere"  e  del  "sacro"  al  cui 
culmine  stava  il  "filosofo,"  ispirato  dal  supremo  "furor"  divino. 

Di  questa  convinzione  non  e  difficile  seguire  le  tracce,  sin  dai  suoi  primi 
scritti^  che,  non  a  caso,  furono  stesi,  tra  il  '51  e  il  '53,  al  tempo  del  suo  sog- 
giorno  padovano  e  dopo  la  decisione  di  abbandonare  gli  studi  di  medicina, 
per  dedicarsi  alia  filosofia  ed  alle  "lettere."  Concepiti  sotto  il  diretto  ed  evi- 
dente  influsso  del  testo  del  Ficino  e  della  dottrina  "sapienziale"  della  poesia 
gia  diversamente  elaborata  anche  dal  Landino  e  dal  Pico,  queste  operette  (che 
recano  pero  la  traccia  delle  sue  letture  aristoteliche  e  del  suo  studio  della  let- 
teratura  medica),  sembrano  indicare  un  distacco  polemico  non  solo  dal  "pe- 
ripatetismo"  dominante  nell'insegnamento  dello  Studio,  bensi  dalle  idee 
dominanti  in  altri  ambienti  intellettu2ili  patavini,  particolarmente  sensibili  al 
programma  gia  elaborato  da  Sperone  Speroni  e  dai  suoi  amici  dell'  "Acca- 
demia  degli  Infiammati."^  Ed  e  esatto  quanto  ha  scritto  di  recente  Lina  Bol- 
zoni,^  a  proposito  della  loro  fondamentale  ispirazione  neoplatonica  e  del  loro 
nesso  con  la  dottrina  "astrologica"  che  fa  dipendere  i  poteri  e  la  "rivelazione" 
poetica  dai  superiori  influssi  delle  stelle  e  dei  corpi  celesti.  Come  scrive,  nel 
Discorso  della  diversita  de'  furori  poetici,  il  Patrizi  e  certo  che  le  anime  umane, 
create  nell'eterno  intelletto  divino,  "subito  che  sono  prodotte  si  vestono  di  un 
corpicello  sottilissimo,  della  sostanza  di  questo  cielo  sovrapposto,  il  qual  cor- 
picello  ritiene  sempre  la  proprieta  di  quella  Stella,  che  gli  e  piu  vicina,  quando 
e  disgiunto  dal  luogo  suo."^  Questa  concezione,  di  cui  sarebbe  agevole  indi- 
care i  pill  lontani  precedenti  anche  in  alcuni  celebri  testi  di  Avicenna,  lo  in- 
duce a  ritenere  che  proprio  dalle  influenze  astrali  derivi  "quel  primo  rivo 
dell'ingegno  e  dell'  inclinazione,"  donde  poi  scaturisce  il  "furore,"  "a  guisa  di 
rapido  fiume"  che  "s'accresce  quando  dalle  Muse  gli  e  piovuta  acqua  in  piu 
abondante  copia."^  Ma,  naturalmente,  le  "Muse"  sono  soltanto  le  personifi- 
cazioni  mitiche  e  mitologiche  delle  intelligenze  celesti,  generatrici  ed  educa- 
trici  degli  "influssi"  celesti  che  operano  anche  per  mezzo  dei  "Demoni"  destinati 
al  loro  servizio.^^ 

Sottolineando  il  valore  e  la  funzione  "divina"  del  "furore,"  senza  il  quale  non 
e  possibile  alcuna  vera  esperienza  e  parola  "poetica,"  il  Patrizi  attribuisce,  in- 
somma,  I'origine  della  poesia  alia  condizione  metafisica  e  cosmica  dell'anima, 
nella  sua  discesa  dal  cielo  a\  mondo  terreno;  e,  nondimeno,  la  sua  dottrina 
platonica  lo  induce  anche  a  riconoscere  I'importanza  rivelatrice  dell'appren- 


CESARE  VASOLI 


245 


dimento  tecnico  retorico-letterario  al  quale  va  connesso  il  compito  di  ridestare 
neH'anima  la  memoria  smarrita  della  sua  partecipazione  al  mondo  archetipo.^^ 
Solo  cosi  puo  ridestarsi  quel  "furore  poetico"  che  — per  il  giovane  filosofo  — e 
la  prima  rivelazione  del  rapporto  tra  I'anima  e  la  suprema  fonte  dello  Essere 
e  che,  quindi,  secondo  la  dottrina  platonica,  puo  dar  luogo  agli  altri  superiori 
"furori,"  il  "ministeriale,"  il  "profetico"  e  1'  "amoroso."  Cio  significa  che  la  poe- 
sia  e  il  momento  iniziale  e,  tuttavia,  indispensabile  di  un'esperienza  sapien- 
ziale  destinata  a  culminare  nella  profezia  e,  infine,  nella  "deificazione"  della 
natura  umana,  totalmente  risolta  nell'atto  unitivo  dell'Amore  divino.  Ne 
stupisce  —  come  dimostrano  sia  il  Discorso,  sia  la  Lettura  sopra  il  sonetto  del  Pe- 
trarca  "La  gola,  e'l  sonno  e  I'ociose  piume"^^  —  che  la  favola  "poetica"  sia  subito  con- 
siderata  come  lo  strumento  di  una  rivelazione  operata  aincora  in  modo 
immaginoso  e  allegorico,  ma  destinata  a  trasformarsi  nella  potenza  divinatrice 
dell'intelletto  profetico  e  nella  plena  adesione  al  divino  dell'intelletto  filosofico. 


II. 


Si  potrebbe  insistere  a  lungo  su  questi  temi  che,  del  resto,  hanno  gia  tro- 
vato  una  lucida  esegesi  nell'analisi  della  Bolzoni.  Ma  credo  che,  per  intendere 
gli  sviluppi  piu  avanzati  della  concezione  patriziana,  si  debba  guardare  piut- 
tosto  a  due  altre  operette  che  il  chersino  pubblico  a  Venezia,  tra  il  1560  e  il 
1561:  i  Dialoghi  della  Historia^^  e  i  Dialoghi  della  Retorica}^  Come  ho  cercato  di 
mostrare  altrove,^^  I'intenzione  del  filosofo  e:  1)  di  condurre  una  critica  ra- 
dicale  contro  alcune  concezioni  che  avevano  avuto  il  piu  coerente  sviluppo 
nelle  proposte  "enciclopediche"  dell'  "Accademia  degli  Infiammati";  2)  di  svol- 
gere  una  concezione  del  linguaggio,  delle  sue  funzioni,  capacita  e  poteri  che 
mira  a  contrapporre  I'antica,  originaria  "potenza"  della  "parola"  alia  sua  ri- 
duzione  a  strumento  del  potere  e  delle  istituzioni.  Cio  risulta  evidente  proprio 
nei  Dialoghi  della  Historia  che  hanno  come  bersaglio  immediato  una  particolare 
dottrina  del  linguaggio  che,  in  stretto  rapporto  con  le  esigenze  del  potere,  ne 
ha  distrutto  la  verita  e  il  valore  "cosmico,"  sostituiti  da  una  falsa  immagine 
del  sapere  affidata  a  quei  "libri"  e  "commenti"  umani  ormai  frapposti  tra  Tuomo 
e  il  mondo,  tra  le  "parole"  e  le  "cose."^^  Tale  corruzione  non  ha  risparmiato 
neppure  la  memoria  o  "storia,"  ridotta  esclusivamente  alia  narrazione  di  azio- 
ni  politiche  e  la  cui  utilita  e  limitata  solo  all'ambito  della  "felicita  civile,"  ma 
sempre  insidiata  dalle  manipolazioni  dei  "potenti."^''  Sicche  la  via  per  risalire 
alle  vere  fonti  della  "sapientia"  (che  il  Patrizi  unisce  al  mito  di  un'origine  di- 
vina  del  cosmo  e  dell'uomo)  passa,  in  primo  luogo,  attra verso  il  "disvelamento" 
della  vera  natura  della  corrente  "dottrina  deU'eloquio,"  alia  quale  deve  essere 
sostituita  una  scienza  rigorosa  che  abbia  la  stessa  certezza  delle  matematiche, 
uniche  scienze  indubitabili.   Si  comprende  perche  il  Patrizi  decida  subito 


246  LINGUAGGIO,    POESIA  E  MARAVIGLIA 

di  misurarsi  su  alcuni  argomenti  tra  i  piu  dibattuti  al  suo  tempo  che,  attra- 
verso  la  stretta  connessione  tra  i  principi  della  retorica  classica  e  la  dottrina 
aristotelica  delle  "arti  del  discorso,"  avevano  costituito  una  concezione  del  lin- 
guaggio  e  del  sapere  da  lui  recisamente  respinta. 

Di  questi  propositi,  perseguiti  sia  pure  tra  molte  ambiguita,  oscurita  e 
incertezze,  lo  stesso  Patrizi  si  mostra  ben  consapevole,  sin  dalle  prime  pagine 
dei  Dialoghi  della  Historia.  Egli  dichiara,  infatti,  che  I'operetta  e  solo  una  parte 
della  sua  "impresa  dell'eloquenza,"  ossia  un  "non  picciol  saggio"  di  una  ricerca 
assai  piu  vasta,  destinata  a  trattare  non  solo  dell'  "oratoria,"  bensi  di  "tutti  i 
parlatori  et  i  scrittori,"^^  Aggiunge  pure  che  un  tale  progetto  non  sara  piii 
condotto  "per  via  delle  osservanze  dei  tre  soli  generi  (retorici),  ma  per  via  di 
scienza,  et  delle  cagioni,  et  de'  principi  primi  del  parlare,"  ben  al  di  la,  dunque, 
dei  limiti  della  disciplina  del  discorso  tradizionale.  Ne  dubita  che  una  simile 
impresa  "incredibile  utilita  apportera  al  mondo,"  riconducendo  la  conoscenza 
del  linguaggio  a  quel  sicuri  fondamenti  filosofici  gia  appena  accennati  da 
Platone.  Percio  la  discussione  patriziana  della  storia  non  e  separabile  dalla 
sua  critica  generale  della  retorica  classica,  delle  sue  origini  e  meccanismi,  fondata 
com'e  suUa  consapevolezza  che  la  storia  e,  in  primo  luogo,  "narrazione"  e 
"parola,"  tentativo  di  restituire,  attraverso  i  suoi  moduli  espressivi,  "cose"  e 
"azioni"  che  sono  "passate"  e  restano  affidate  soltanto  alia  "memoria."  Cio  pone 
subito  il  problema  della  corrispondenza  tra  "parola"  e  "cosa,"  "discorso," 
"memoria"  e  "verita"  che  e,  appunto,  il  tema  centrale  dei  Dialoghi  della  Hi- 
storia^ ispirati  dalla  certezza  che,  nella  societa  e  nella  storia  degli  uomini, 
dominate  dal  bisogno  e  dalla  paura,  il  linguaggio,  manipolato  e  piegato  se- 
condo  le  necessita  del  potere,  ha  perduto  la  sua  antica  identita  "divina"  con 
I'Essere.  Cosi  il  Patrizi  puo  procedere,  usando  il  procedimento  elenchistico 
dei  dialoghi  "socratici"  di  Platone,  a  una  revisione  di  tutti  i  "loci  communes" 
suUa  storia,  delle  "defmizioni"  che  ne  hanno  dato  la  tradizione  retorica  classica 
ed  i  suoi  epigoni,  e  della  sua  "verita,"  "utilita"  e  "dignita,"  sempre  esaltate 
in  forma  oratoria  e  mai  davvero  verificate.^^  L'autore  e  consapevole  che  un 
simile  disegno  (i  cui  punti  di  riferimento  critico  piu  diretto  sono  gli  scritti  suUa 
storia  dello  Speroni^^  e  del  Robortello^^)  implica  la  messa  in  discussione  di 
opinion!  generalmente  accolte  nella  cultura  del  suo  tempo  e  che,  anzi,  costi- 
tuiscono  I'implicito  presupposto  della  riduzione  della  storia  a  "genere"  e  "mo- 
dello"  oratorio.  Non  ignora  neppure  la  difficolta  del  suo  tentativo  che,  proprio 
con  la  ricerca  dei  "principj  primi  del  parlare,"  introduce  alcuni  elementi  tra 
i  piii  eversivi  dell'ordine  costituito  del  sapere  e  della  gerarchia  delle  sue  sci- 
enze.  Ritengo,  anzi,  che  proprio  da  questo  derivi  la  particolare  tessitura  dei 
Dialoghi  della  Historia  e  dei  Dialoghi  della  Retorica,  con  il  loro  procedimento 
apparentemente  sconce rtante,  nel  singolare  intreccio  tra  una  minuziosa  in- 
dagine  analitica  (ripresa  anch'essa  dai  dialoghi  platonici),  I'uso  di  miti  assai 
suggestivi,  I'appello  a  grandi  ipotesi  metafisico-cosmologiche,  un  puntiglioso 
procedimento  elenchistico  spinto  sino  ad  esiti  "sofistici"  e  il  costante  mo- 


CESARE  VASOLI  247 

tivo  del  divino  "stupore"  che  restituisce  il  pensiero  al  suo  diretto  rapporto  con 
la  realta.^^ 

Purtroppo  la  maggior  parte  degli  studiosi  che  si  sono  occupati  di  questa  ope- 
retta hanno  ceduto  alia  tentazione  di  giudicarla  sul  fondamento  delle  proprie 
convinzioni  e  metodologie  storiografiche,  quando  non  vi  hanno  scoperto  ipote- 
tici  "germi"  di  teorie  assai  posteriori  e,  magari,  discutibili  precorrimenti  di  ti- 
piche  dottrine  vichiane.^^  Se,  pero,  si  consideramo  gli  argomenti  davvero  piu 
tipici  dei  Dialoghi  della  Historia,  appare  chiaro  che  il  Patrizi  intende  contrap- 
porre  a  un  discorso  suUa  storia  concepito  entro  i  termini  dell'insegnamento 
etico-politico  e  condotto  con  lo  strumento  dell'  "exemplum"  una  sua  visione 
cosmica  del  destino  umano,  risolta  nella  dottrina  dei  grandi  cicli  universali  e 
delle  influenze  astrali  dominanti  su  tutte  le  vicende  terrene.^*  Un'idea  del 
mondo  e  deH'uomo  (che  ha  gia  alcuni  tratti  non  dissimili  da  quella  che  sara 
propria  del  Bruno)  lega,  cosi,  la  storia  del  "mondo  maggiore"  a  quella  del 
"mondo  minore,"  I'eterna  vicissitudine  dell'universo  a  quella  delle  civilta,  delle 
religioni,  degli  "imperia,"  delle  societa  e  degli  individui,  incomprensibili  e  in- 
definibili  se  non  sono  intese  nell'unita  del  Tutto.  II  mito  delle  "molteplici"  morti 
e  dei  "rinascimenti"  del  mondo  sembra,  in  effetti,  Tunica  "sapientia"  che  possa 
dare  un  qualche  senso  alia  storia,  risolvere  I'apparente  dissoluzione  di  un  rac- 
conto  d'infiniti  destini  nella  ferma  certezza  di  un  'assoluta  legge  cosmica. ^^  Si 
tratta,  pero,  di  una  "sapienza"  che  puo  rivelarsi  soltanto  nella  "febbre"  e  nello 
"humor  di  malinconia"  del  filosofo,  allorche,  chiusi  i  libri  degli  uomini,  si  pone 
a  leggere  il  "libro  interiore"  della  mente,  nei  cui  "geroglifici"  sono  scritte  "tutte 
le  cose  del  mondo. "^^  Percio  i  linguaggi  umani,  cosi  molteplici  e  diversi  (e, 
per  questo,  incapaci  di  esprimere  la  "verita"  che  e  unica  ed  una)  debbono  ri- 
nunziare  alia  loro  pretesa  di  esprimere  le  "cose"  che  solo  il  linguaggio  mentale, 
affidato  agli  archetipi  eterni,  puo  indicare.  Ma  proprio  la  lettura  del  "libro 
deU'anima"  rivela  al  Patrizi  che  le  venerate  defmizioni  della  storia  proposte  dagli 
antichi  retori  o  dai  loro  seguaci  moderni  si  dissolvono  al  confronto  con  la  mu- 
te vole  crescita  del  tempo  storico,  dal  passato  al  presente  ed  al  futuro  della  "pro- 
fezia,"  con  la  sterminata  molteplicita  delle  sue  "materie"  e  la  moltiplicazione 
delle  forme  espressive  del  racconto,  le  quali  non  possono  essere  ridotte  soltanto 
alia  scrittura,  perche  comprendono,  di  pieno  diritto  anche  la  pittura,  la  scul- 
tura,  I'architettura,  ecc.^''  Se  la  storia  e  memoria,  ogni  segno  che  la  tramandi, 
ogni  linguaggio  che  la  trasmetta  le  appartengono  ugualmente.  Che,  anzi,  la 
prima  "storia"  fu  espressa  solo  da  "segni,"  come  quelli  che  gli  Egiziani  trac- 
ciarono,  a  Memfi,  sulla  colonna  che  fermava  la  memoria  delle  "crescenze  et 
inondazioni  del  Nilo."^^  Non  solo:  gia  molti  secoli  prima  del  diluvio,  i  primi 
padri  del  genere  umano  previdero,  "o  per  astrologia,  o  per  inspiration  divina," 
la  futura  rovina  del  mondo  e  ne  lasciarono  incisi  sulla  pietra  i  segni  premo- 
nitori.  Cosi  la  prima  storia  fu,  insieme,  "memoria"  e  "divinazione,"  conoscenza 
non  solo  del  passato,  bensi  anche  del  futuro,  nella  quzde  era  pero  gi^  rivelato 
il  comune  destino  di  tutte  le  cose.^^ 


248  LINGUAGGIO,    POESIA   E  MARAVIGLIA 

III. 

Con  tutto  questo,  il  Patrizi  sa  bene  che  la  storia  ha  pure  una  sua  "utilita" 
e  "necessita"  pratiche  e  che  dalla  visione  cidica  della  storia  del  mondo  si  puo 
e  si  deve  discendere  a  quella  delle  vicende  umane,  connessa  ai  bisogni  piii  pro- 
fondi  della  nostra  natura,  sempre  anelante  all'  "essere,"  al  "bene  essere"  ed  al 
"sempre  essere."  Nella  finzione  dei  Dialoghi,  questa  considerazione  e,  non  a 
caso,  affidata  a  Daniele  Sanudo,^^  ossia  ad  un  patrizio  veneziano,  chiamato, 
per  il  suo  stato  sociale,  ad  essere  naturalmente  uno  dei  governanti  della  sua 
Repubblica.  Per  lui,  come  per  tutti  coloro  che  guidano  le  imperfette  e  caduche 
comunita  umane  (e  che  non  sono  "filosofi,"  bensi  "ricchi"  e  "potenti"),  la  co- 
noscenza  della  storia  ha  senso  solo  se  permette  loro  di  agire  con  una  cogni- 
zione  del  passato  che  — come  ha  insegnato  anche  Machiavelli  —  possa  servire 
a  prevenire  i  mali  ed  i  pericoli  che  minacciano  la  pace,  unico  possibile  bene 
umano. 

E'  quindi  comprensibile  che  spetti,  invece,  a  Luca  Contile^^  (un  uomo  di 
lettere  assai  pratico  della  vita  delle  corti  e  familiare  dei  "potenti")  affrontare 
il  tema  cruciale  della  "verita"  della  narrazione  storica;  e  di  farlo,  usando  ar- 
gomenti  che  mirano  a  sfatare  i  "loci  communes"  di  una  lunga  tradizione  clas- 
sica  ed  umanistica.  II  Contile  afferma,  senza  reticenza,  che  nessuna  storia 
"scritta  da  huomo"  puo  essere  vera  e  che  la  memoria  affidata  alia  sua  narra- 
zione e  sempre  corrotta,  parziale  o  deformata,  quando  non  e  coscientemente 
falsificata.^^  Lo  storico  narra,  infatti,  o  la  storia  dei  suoi  tempi  o  quella  di 
tempi  passati;  e,  in  questo  secondo  caso,  dipende  da  "relazioni"  o  "testimo- 
nianze"  di  altri  uomini  che,  a  loro  volta,  o  furono  testimoni  di  eventi  presenti 
o  si  servirono  di  scritti  e  memorie  altrui,  suUa  quali  si  possono  sempre  sol- 
levare  i  piu  ampi  dubbi.  Nel  primo  caso,  invece  — e  il  Patrizi  mira  qui  ad 
un  punto  essenziale  del  lungo  e  mai  esaurito  dibattito  sull'  "obiettivita" 
storiografica  —  lo  storico  puo  essere,  certo,  testimone  di  quanto  accade;  ma 
sara  sempre  anche  il  sostenitore  o  I'amico  di  una  "parte"  in  causa  e,  percio, 
fatalmente  indotto  a  deformare  la  propria  narrazione,  per  ragioni  di  odio  o 
di  amicizia;  oppure  sara  davvero  uno  "spettatore"  neutrale  che,  in  quanto  tale, 
potra  pero  difficilmente  essere  a  conoscenza  delle  "cause"  e  dei  "consigli"  che 
soli  "danno  regola  a  quel  fatto."^^  Lo  storico,  insomma,  sara  sempre  costretto 
ad  affidarsi  soltanto  alia  "fama"  fallace,  contradditoria  ed  incerta  (e  che  il  Pa- 
trizi, nei  Dialoghi  della  Retorica,^*  considera  la  piu  docile  "serva"  dei  "Principi 
della  terra").  Oppure  dovra,  forse,  accettare  che  la  storia  abbia  soltanto  un' 
"utilita"  politica,  anche  a  costo  di  "fmgere  ad  arbitrio  le  cose,"  pur  d'insegnare 
agli  uomini,  per  mezzo  di  "favole"  e  di  "fmzioni,"  la  loro  possibile  felicita  ci- 
vile? E'  un'ipotesi,  questa,  che  contrasta  in  modo  irreparabile,  con  la  defmi- 
zione  della  storia  come  "memoria  delle  cose  umane,"  definizione  che  ne 
presuppone  la  sua  essenziale  verita  e  che,  appunto  per  questo,  la  distingue 
dalla  "poesia."  Ma  il  ragionamento  che  il  Patrizi  attribuisce  al  Contile  va  an- 


CESARE  VASOLI  249 

cora  piu  a  fondo,  perche  questi  osserva  che  la  storia  e  sempre  scritta  da  "huom 
di  governo"  o  da  "huom  di  volgo"  e  che  la  narrazione  degli  eventi  politic!  e 
delle  loro  cause,  stesa  da  uomini  che  hanno  comune  parte  nel  potere,  sara 
sempre  condizionata  da  due  sentimenti  che  inducono  lo  storico  a  distorcere 
il  proprio  linguaggio  e  la  propria  ricostruzione  dei  fatti:  1'  "adulazione"  e  la 
"paura,"  dominanti  in  tutte  le  societa  umane.^^  Pero  I'origine  piij  diretta  della 
"falsita"  che  oscura  la  memoria  del  passato  e  indicata,  piuttosto,  nell'  "occul- 
tamento"  voluto  dai  potenti,  i  quali  mai  saranno  disposti  a  dire  "con  verita 
le  cose  loro,"  poiche  si  considerano  "per  la  potenza  loro,  quasi  Dei  infra  gli 
altri  uomini"  ed  hanno  forza  e  terrore  sufficienti  per  impedire  che  altri  le  nar- 
rino.  Costoro  —  scrive  il  Patrizi— "tengono  in  gran  pregio  I'utile,  piia  che  il  vero," 
sono,  anzi,  "capital  nemici  della  verita"  che  vogliono  ad  ogni  costo  celare,  con 
la  menzogna  o  con  I'adulazione,  per  nascondere  la  realta  effettiva  delle  cose, 
le  debolezze,  i  guasti,  i  mali  del  loro  potere.^^  O,  com'e  detto  con  parole  di 
grande  efficacia:  "Lo  stato  da'  Prencipi  amato,  cammina  con  la  possanza,  et 
con  la  prudentia,  vestito  di  lunga  reputatione,  sventoUata  dalla  verita,  forbita 
dalla  bocca  degli  adulatori";  e  i  principi  hanno  ben  ragione  di  "far  inghiottire 
questo  vento  della  verita,"  perche,  se  fosse  lasciato  libero,  li  mostrerebbe  quaili 
sono  davvero,  distruggendo  la  vana  favola  della  loro  maesta  quasi  divina.^^ 
Per  questo,  essi  sono  pronti  a  favorire  chi  scrive  la  loro  storia,  ma  e  disposto 
a  tacere,  ad  adulare  e  coprire  la  verita  delle  loro  azioni  con  la  favolosa  e  po- 
tentissima  suggestione  della  "maraviglia."  Questa  "maravigliosa  adulteratrice 
dell'animo  nostro"  e,  infatti,  lo  strumento  che  tutti  i  potenti  utilizzano  "per 
tenersi  divoti  i  popoli  loro,  e  timidi  gli  altri,"  I'affascinante  finzione  che,  per 
virtii  della  parola,  nasconde  la  vera  realta  delle  cose  e  riveste  la  memoria  dei 
colori  del  mito.^^ 

Una  fatale  corruzione  che,  per  il  Patrizi,  sembra  connaturata  alia  stessa  na- 
tura  del  potere,  intorbida,  dunque,  e  falsica,  sin  dalle  origini,  il  ricordo  degli 
eventi  umani.  Nei  Dialoghi  della  Retorica,  questa  corruttela  e  addirittura  estesa 
alia  stessa  radice  sociale  e  storica  del  linguaggio,  sottoposto  ad  una  manipo- 
lazione  che  si  serve  della  suggestione  verbale,  dell'  apparenza  dell'  "ornamen- 
tum,"  del  giuoco  capzioso  delle  "figure,"  dei  "tropi"  e  dei  "colori"  retorici. 


IV. 

II  tema  e,  infatti,  enunciate  sin  dzdle  prime  pagine,  mediante  un'analisi  della 
"lode"  oratoria  e  dei  metodi  di  "amplificazione"  e  di  "adornamento"  che,  in  ef- 
fetti,  deformano  e  nascondono  atti,  eventi  e  "persone,"  imponendo  ad  essi  una 
maschera  ingannevole.  La  lode  — scrive  il  Patrizi  —  e  come  una  "vescica,"  gonfia 
soltanto  del  "fiato"  delle  parole,  un  parlare  "fadso,"  adulterato  e  sempre  pre- 
disposto  per  uno  scopo  non  "verace."^^  Ma  questa  ripresa  di  una  condanna, 
gia  esposta  anche  in  alcune  celebri  pagine  erasmiane,*^  si  trasforma  subito 


250  LINGUAGGIO,    POESIA  E  MARAVIGLIA 

nella  analisi  dello  stesso  "parlare,"  della  sua  natura,  funzione  e  inevitabile  ina- 
deguatezza,  fonte  perenne  di  errore,  e  pure  strumento  di  dominio.  II  filosofo 
non  dubita  che  le  cose,  i  concetti  di  esse  che  si  formano  nelle  menti  umane 
e  le  parole  che  li  esprimono  siano,  in  realta,  del  tutto  diverse  tra  loro;  e  che 
corrano  tra  di  essi  dei  rapporti  sempre  incerti  e  approssimativi,  tali  da  im- 
pedire  ai  nostri  "segni"  di  corrispondere  all'universo  dei  fatti  mentali  e  degli 
eventi  naturali.  Questa  radicale  "poverta"  del  linguaggio,  le  cui  "parole"  sono 
del  tutto  sproporzionate  all'  infinita  ricchezza  del  mondo,  costituisce  un  limite 
invalicabile  del  sapere  umano  che,  nella  meditazione  del  Patrizi,  assume,  ad- 
dirittura,  il  carattere  di  una  "punizione"  divina,  connessa  con  le  stesse  origini 
delle  societa  umane. *^  E,  difatti,  uno  scrittore  sempre  cosi  legato  all'ispira- 
zione  platonica  ed  ermetica  e  cosi  abile  nella  ripresa  di  miti  resi  familiari  dalla 
versione  ficiniana  dei  grandi  dialoghi,  puo  favoleggiare  di  un'eta  originaria 
di  perfezione  e  di  plena  "corrispondenza"  tra  gli  uomini  e  I'uni verso,  prima 
di  un  terribile  sconvolgimento  cosmico  che,  punendoli  per  la  loro  volonta  di 
sapere  e  per  il  loro  desiderio  di  uguagliarsi  agli  dei,  li  ha  costretti  a  vivere  ormai 
lontani  dad  "cielo,"  chiusi  in  una  conoscenza  irreparabilmente  imperfetta  ed 
illusoria.  In  quel  tempo  antichissimo,  di  cui  ora  non  resta  piu  memoria,  quando 
cielo  e  terra  si  confondevano  e  gli  dei  abitavano  e  coUoquiavano  con  gli  uo- 
mini, su  tutto  regnava  un  comune  spirito  divino  del  quale  partecipava  anche 
la  parola  umana.  I  Persiani,  gli  Egizi  e  i  Traci  — scrive  il  Patrizi  —  avevano  al- 
lora  "tanta  forza  ne'  loro  detti  che  riduceano  a  virtii  gli  animi  de'  piu  malvagi, 
risanavano  gli  infermi,  resuscitavano  i  morti  e  anco  li  faceano  immortali  quando 
a  grado  li  era";  e  il  loro  discorso  era  capace  di  dominare  le  "fiere  selvagge"  e 
gli  "orridi  boschi,"  di  far  fiorire  e  fruttare  le  piante,  verdeggiare  le  campagne 
o  seccare  le  erbe,  suscitare  o  moderare  I'impeto  dei  fmmi,  far  sorgere  o  pro- 
sciugare  le  fonti,  sollevare  o  acquietare  le  tempeste,  mutare  di  luogo  i  monti, 
attrarre  la  luna  o  fermare  il  sole/^  II  linguaggio  aveva,  insomma,  alle  sue  ori- 
gini, forze  e  poteri  "magici"  che  lo  rendevano  conoscitore  e  signore  delle  piu 
segrete  leggi  cosmiche.  Ma,  dopo  la  "caduta"  della  terra  e  la  "gran  ruina  del 
linguaggio  umano"  e  andata  smarrita  la  "verita  delle  cose."  E  la  nostra  mente 
puo  solo  aggirarsi  tra  lontane  "somiglianze  del  vero"  che  le  parole  non  rie- 
scono  neppure  a  restituire,  nella  loro  miseria  di  "segni"  troppo  difformi  da  cio 
che  dovrebbero  "significare."  E  chiaro  che  il  Patrizi  disegna  una  "favola"  al- 
legorica  e  allusiva,  secondo  il  costume  della  cultura  del  suo  tempo,  avvezza 
ad  ogni  forma  di  linguaggio  "parabolico"  e  "cifrato."  II  suo  significato  puo  ap- 
parire,  tuttavia,  piu  trasparente,  quando,  nelle  stesse  pagine,  leggiamo  che 
anche  I'universo  e  soltanto  un  "segno"  o  un  "sistema  di  segni"  che  "parlano" 
e  possiedono  un  proprio  linguaggio  il  cui  senso  rispecchia  I'assoluta  verita  del 
cosmo,  la  sua  eterna  unita  e  identita.'^^  Attraverso  quel  "discorso"  passano 
tutti  gli  influssi,  le  forze,  le  segrete  intelligenze  che,  nell'ordine  delle  gerarchie 
cosmiche,  gener2ino  e  governano  tutte  le  cose  del  mondo.  Pero  un  linguaggio 
cosi  "maraviglioso"  non  e  piu  comprensibile  alle  menti  umane  ed  alle  loro 


CESARE  VASOLI  25I 

"lingue,"  perche  esse  sono  schiave  della  "paura,"  temono  la  potenza,  1'  "ar- 
bitrio"  e  1'  "invidia"  divini  che  le  h2inno  condannate  al  silenzio  ed  al  "non  sa- 
pere.'"^*  La  paura  e,  del  resto,  per  il  Patrizi  — nato  in  una  famiglia 
perseguitata  per  ragioni  politiche  e  religiose  — il  sentimento  dominante  nel 
mondo  umano,  anzi,  I'origine  di  ogni  infelicita,  violenza,  oppressione  e  in- 
giustizia.  Non  solo:  la  paura  impone  che  anche  le  scarse  conoscenze  umane 
restino  celate  o  siano  comunicate  soltanto  sotto  forma  di  finzioni  o  di  "fa vole," 
in  modo  nascosto  e  coperto.  Perche  —  com'e  scritto  in  una  pagina  davvero  ri- 
velatrice  dei  Dialoghi  della  Retorica:  "Et  quindi  sono  le  scienzie  insegnate  in 
enimmi,  in  favole,  in  figure,  in  numeri,  in  sacrarj,  sotto  silenzio,  et  in  mille 
altri  nascosti  modi.  Et  quindi  e  parimenti  che  i  Prencipi  et  gli  altri  che  hanno 
voluto  poter  molto  al  mondo,  hanno  seguito  le  credenze  degli  huomini  vol- 
gari,  sappiendo  elle  essere  lontanissime  dal  vero,  et  dal  periglio.  Et,  per  lo 
contrario,  hanno  perseguitato,  con  ogni  maniera  d'afflitione,  et  mortalmente 
odiato  coloro,  ch'hanno  voluto  dir  vero  in  qual  si  voglia  picciola  cosa."*^ 

L'allusione  alia  realta  effettuale  dei  suoi  tempi  ed  all'imposizione  di  una  "ser- 
vitu  della  paura"  che  non  e  soltanto  politica  e  religiosa,  ma  inquina  le  stesse 
fonti  della  conoscenza  e  del  discorso  umani  non  potrebbe  essere  piu  traspa- 
rente.  Credo,  tuttavia,  che  le  parole  del  Patrizi  abbiano  una  mira  ancora  piu 
alta,  quando  individua  proprio  nella  paura  il  fondamento  delle  societa  umane 
e,  insieme,  del  desiderio  di  possesso  di  dominio  donde  sono  poi  nate  tutte  le 
istituzioni,  gli  "ordini"  e  i  "giudizi"  che  le  reggono.  II  tema,  certo,  non  e  nuovo; 
e  sarebbe  facile  indicarne  le  numerose  possibili  fonti  classiche  e  contempora- 
nee.  L'elemento  originale  e,  pero,  costituito  dalla  convinzione  che  la  forma- 
zione  di  societa  sempre  soggette  alia  paura  ha  condizionato  anche  il  linguaggio, 
facendo  di  esso,  soprattutto,  uno  strumento  del  potere  civile  o  religioso,  volto 
a  costruire  le  "molte  et  lunghe  catene  di  parole,  con  le  quali  legando  la  gius- 
tizia  e  la  pace,  per  li  piedi,  per  le  braccia  e  pel  traverso  e  per  lo  coUo"  si 
costituisce  I'ordine  coattivo  delle  "istituzioni."*^  E  i  "capi  delle  catene," 
chiamati  "leggi,"  furono  e  sono  sempre  affidati  ad  uomini  anch'essi  dominati 
e  guidati  dalla  paura.  Cosi  il  linguaggio  e  diventato  ed  e  rimasto,  in  gran 
parte,  "favellare  di  giudizio"  e  "favellare  di  consiglio,"  ossia  discorso  costruito 
second©  le  esigenze  dell'ordine  politico  e  la  volonta  di  utilizzarlo  per  volgere, 
secondo  i  propri  fmi,  le  convinzioni  e  la  volonta  degli  altri  uomini.*^  Per- 
duta  la  sua  identita  con  il  perfetto  linguaggio  delle  origini,  costretto  dalla 
separazione  tra  le  "parole"  e  le  "cose"  ad  affidarsi  ad  espressioni  sempre  oscure 
ed  equivoche,  la  lingua  degli  uomini  ha  quindi  avuto  come  sue  principali  "arena" 
i  tribunali  e  i  consessi  del  potere,  dove  essa  ha  esercitato  tutte  le  "virtu,"  mu- 
tando  in  persuasione  e  suggestione  quanto  le  restava  della  sua  antica  potenza 
sacrale.  Nacque,  in  tal  modo,  I'arte  degli  "oratori"  il  cui  solo  scopo  era  quelle 
d'influire  sui  giudizi  dei  magistrati  e  sulle  decisioni  dei  cittadini,  oppure  di 
celebrare  uomini  ed  eventi  con  la  "lode"  o  denigrarli  con  il  "vituperio."**  Ep- 
pure  coloro  che  teorizzarono  quell'arte,  mentre  riconoscevano  che  la  sua  fun- 


252  LINGUAGGIO,    POESIA  E  MARAVIGLIA 

zione  essenziale  consistesse  nel  disputare  sul  "giusto"  e  1'  "ingiusto"  o  su  cio 
che  e  utile  o  nocivo  alia  "vita  civile,"  vollero  anche  che  essa  fosse  capace  di 
dire  "di  tutto"  e  "su  tutto"  e  divenisse  la  norma  di  un  preteso  discorso  universale, 
esteso  a  tutte  le  arti  e  le  scienze,  capace  di  far  proprio  ogni  sapere  e  di  sosti- 
tuirsi  alia  "verita.'"^^ 

Non  voglio  insistere  oltre  — I'ho  gia  fatto  altrove^^  —  sulla  sottile  e  radicale 
critica  patriziana  della  retorica  antica  e  dei  suoi  stessi  esiti  umanistici,  volta, 
soprattutto,  a  contestare  che  la  dottrina  del  linguaggio  dominante  nella  cul- 
tura  del  suo  tempo  possa  restituire  al  discorso  umano  le  funzioni  e  i  poteri  ori- 
ginari.  Su  questo  punto  I'attacco  e  rigoroso  e  preciso:  1'  "oratoria,"  cosi  come 
I'hanno  teorizzata  i  suoi  maggiori  maestri,  e  una  tecnica  di  carattere  squisi- 
tamente  politico,  connessa,  oltre  tutto,  ad  un  particolare  momento  della  storia 
del)e  societa  antiche:  e,  insomma,  la  tecnica  della  disputa  giudiziaria  e  della 
"decisione  di  consiglio."  Nondimeno,  essa  si  presenta  anche  come  una  "per- 
suasione"  estensibile  a  tutti  gli  ambiti  della  conoscenza,  mira  a  sostituire  1'  "opi- 
nione"  alia  "scienza"  e,  comunque,  a  fornire  una  "credenza  inferma"  che  puo 
essere  vera  o  falsa,  ma  che,  in  ogni  caso,  e  "mutabile,"  di  contro  al  sapere  "fermo" 
e  "stabile"  che  il  Patrizi  attribuisce  al  supremo  modello  matematico.^^  Anzi, 
r  "oratoria,"  foggiata  sul  "tipo"  delle  liti  giudiziare  e  delle  "dispute"  politiche, 
vuole  imporre  i  suoi  criteri  opinabili,  i  suoi  "entimemi"  e  i  suoi  "luoghi,"  usur- 
pando  quanto  spetta  alia  rigorosa  dimostrazione.  E  tutto  questo,  nonostante 
che  lo  stesso  Aristotele  neghi  al  retore  anche  il  possesso  di  questi  strumenti, 
quando  afferma  che  ogni  tipo  e  forma  di  sillogismo  (e,  quindi,  anche  1'  "en- 
timema")  e  di  pertinenza  del  logico,  cosi  come  egli  dichiara  che  la  materia 
specifica  dell'  "oratoria"  e,  in  sostanza,  la  stessa  di  cui  trattano  il  "filosofo  ci- 
vile" e  il  "filosofo  morale !"^^ 

Sembrerebbe,  dunque,  che  la  critica  del  Patrizi  si  chiuda  con  la  condanna 
radicale  dell'  "oratoria"  e  della  retorica,  considerate,  del  resto,  non  tanto  delle 
"arti,"  quanto,  piuttosto,  mere  "osservazioni"  e  "perizie"  derivate  dalla  pratica 
e  dalla  consuetudine  degli  usi  e  precetti  linguistici.  Ma  e  significativo  che  il 
filosofo  non  rinunzi,  anche  adesso,  a  cercare  una  nuova  via  per  riscattare  il 
linguaggio,  liberandolo  dagli  insegnamenti  di  quei  maestri  ai  quali  troppo  spesso 
si  e  attribuito  un  falso  ossequio  dovuto  soltanto  alia  loro  relativa  antiquita. 
Anticipando  uno  dei  motivi  centrali  della  sua  amplissima  polemica  antiari- 
stotelica,  le  Discussiones  peripateticae,^^  egli  invita  a  risalire  a  quell'  "andata  lun- 
ghissima  antichita,"  prima  che  maestri  quali  Tisia  ed  Empedocle  avessero  preso 
a  dire  e  a  scrivere  di  retorica,  fondando  i  loro  ammaestramenti  sulle  osser- 
vazioni delle  tecniche  usate  nelle  citta  dagli  oratori  "deliberativi"  e  "giudizia- 
ri,"  divenuti  cosi  potenti  negli  stati  dei  loro  tempi. ^'^  Certo,  egli  riconosce  che 
il  linguaggio  e  la  parola  umani  sono  ormai  condizionati  da  un  lungo  periodo 
di  decadenza  e  di  allontanamento  dalla  "sapientia"  difficilmente  superabile;  ma 
propone  ugualmente  una  "riforma"  della  retorica  che,  respingendone  i  canoni 
tradizionali,  accetti  il  principio  che  il  vero  fondamento  dell'  "eloquenza"  e  pro- 


CESARE  VASOLI 


253 


prio  la  "sapienza"  e  che  "retto  parlare"  e  solo  quello  che  si  sforza  d'intendere 
il  "vero,"  anteponendolo  alio  "ornamento"  ed  a  tutte  le  suggestion!  persuasive. 
Percio,  neirultima  parte  dei  Dialoghi,  il  Patrizi  affronta  lo  stesso  tema  che  aveva 
assai  preoccupato  anche  Pietro  Ramo,  ossia  i  rapporti  tra  la  "retorica"  e  la  "dia- 
lettica,"  concepita,  quest'ultima,  come  la  dottrina  che  "inventa"  e  "dispone"  le 
strutture  deH'argomentazione.^^  Non  diversamente  daU'umanista  francese, 
anche  il  chersino  ritiene  che  la  confusione  tra  le  due  discipline  abbia  creato 
equivoci  ed  errori  di  ogni  genere,  particolarmente  pericolosi  per  il  "discorso 
vero";  e  che  una  tale  confusione  debba  essere  dissolta,  affidando  alia 
"dialettica"  —  come  voleva  Platone  — tutta  'Tarte  del  dividere,  del  comporre  e 
del  definire"  ed  alia  "retorica"  quell'  "ornamento"  che  agisce  potentemente  sul- 
I'animo  umano  che  attrae  con  la  "maraviglia."^^  In  tal  modo,  "I'arte,"  pur  nei 
limiti  delle  nostre  possibilita  attuali,  puo  aiutaire  la  natura  e  la  "memoria"  e 
recuperare  il  vero,  originario  "furore"  poetico,  non  piu  avvilito  entro  gli  schemi 
di  una  precettistica  "servile"  e  cogliere  quell'  influsso  celeste  dal  quale  deriva 
la  stessa  potenza  "divina"  della  poesia. 


/  Dialoghi  della  Retorica  furono  pubblicati  nel  1 562 ,  quando  il  Patrizi  era  gia 
impegnato  da  tempo  nella  sua  nuova  attivita  di  amministratore  di  terre  e  vil- 
laggi  nella  lontana  Cipro.  Piu  di  vent'anni  dopo,  ormai  "filosofo  platonico" 
nell'Universita  e  nella  corte  di  Ferrara,  egli  stese  le  "Deche"  de  La  Poetica,^^ 
un'opera  rimasta,  in  parte,  a  lungo  inedita  e  che  solo  da  pochi  anni  puo  essere 
letta  nella  versione  integrale.  E'uno  scritto  di  singolare  importanza,  rivelatore 
non  solo  della  vastissima  erudizione  letter2iria,  filologica  e  storica  del  suo  autore, 
quanto  del  suo  modo  di  concepire  il  linguaggio  e  la  poesia  quali  modi  privi- 
legiati  della  rivelazione  della  "sapientia,"  lungo  il  cammino  che  conduce  alia 
suprema  verita  della  profezia  e  della  "deificatio"  umana.  In  vero,  il  tema  do- 
minante  de  La  Poetica,  proposto  sin  dagli  inizi,  e  una  storia  delle  "origini"  e 
dei  "progressi"  della  poesia  (la  "Deca  istoriale"),  dalla  quale  si  apprende  che 
la  poesia  "comincio  .  .  .  quando  huom  comincio  a  cantare"  e  che  il  suo  "primo 
nascimento"  coincise  con  il  "primo  canto,"  nella  favolosa  eta  dei  "poeti  teologi" 
che  fu  il  tempo  di  Noe  e,  quindi,  dopo  il  diluvio,  quello  di  Zoroastro,  di  Osiri, 
di  Mose,  delle  Sibille  e,  ancora  e  piu  oltre,  di  Lino  e  di  Orfeo.^^  Ma  piu  che 
questo  vastissimo  tentativo  di  una  mitica  storia  comparata  della  poesia  iden- 
tificata  con  la  stessa  rivelazione  della  sapienza  e  verita  delle  origini,  colpisce 
il  proposito  del  Patrizi  di  delineare  il  quadro  universcde  di  tutti  i  "generi"  e 
le  "forme"  dell'antica  poesia,  concepite  come  altrettante  distinzioni  di  tre  mo- 
menti,  articolati  in  un  unico  processo  storico:  i  "poemi  divini,"  i  "poemi  di  na- 
tura" e  i  "poemi  di  cose  umane"  che  sono  il  diverso  esprimersi  del  comune  "furore 
poetico. "^^  Convinto,  come  Platone,  che  "la  poesia  sia  infusa  negli  uomini  per 


254  *  LINGUAGGIO,   POESIA  E  MARAVIGLIA 

furor  divino,"  il  filosofo  ne  ricerca  le  ragioni  e  cause  necessarie,  individuate 
o  nell'azione  diretta  di  una  "divinita"  o,  soprattutto,  in  cause  naturali  e  cos- 
miche,  quali  le  "esalazioni  sotterranee"  e  V  "umore  malinconico"  che  i  poeti  de- 
rivano  dalla  loro  particolare  origine  e  condizione  astrale  che  li  rende  gia  vicini 
e  simili  ai  "profeti."^^  Si  tratta  —  com'e  noto  — di  un  tema  che  MarsiUo  Ficino 
aveva  largamente  svolto  in  uno  dei  suoi  scritti  piu  ambigui  e  inquietanti,  il 
De  vita  coelitus  comparanda,  ma  che  e  presente  anche  nel  suo  fortunatissimo  De 
amore.^^  II  Patrizi  se  ne  serve,  pero,  non  solo  per  respingere  le  dottrine  ari- 
stoteliche  sulla  poesia,  bensi  piuttosto  per  condannare  il  canone  della  "imita- 
zione"  e  dichiarare  che  lo  scopo  essenziale  della  poesia  e  il  potere  di  suscitare 
la  "maraviglia"  e,  insomma,  di  restituire  al  mondo  quel  "mirabile"  che  una  "cieca 
filosofia"  ha  allontanato  dalle  cose  e  dall'uomo.  Certo,  I'autore  delle  Discussiones 
peripateticae  che  ha  condotto,  in  quell'opera,  la  piu  minuziosa  e  rigorosa  critica 
delle  dottrine  e  della  tradizione  aristoteliche,  sa  bene  che  I'eta  dei  "poeti  te- 
ologi,"  custodi  di  una  diretta  rivelazione  sapienziale  e  ormai  chiusa  da  gran 
tempo  e  che  Tunica  via  per  ricuperare  il  "furore  poetico"  passa,  adesso,  attra- 
verso  il  possesso  di  una  compiuta  abilita  tecnica,  capace  di  "ridestare"  la  me- 
moria  perduta  della  prima  rivelazione  e  lo  stupore  e  la  "maraviglia"  primordiali 
donde  nacquero  i  primi  "canti"  umani.^^  Ne  stupisce  che  gran  parte  de  La 
Poetica  sia  appunto  dedicata  alia  ricostruzione  del  "quadro  generale"  di  tutte 
le  espressioni  poetiche,  sempre  generate  dai  "fonti  perenni"  deH'immaginazio- 
ne  e  della  vera  invenzione  retorica,  produttrici  del  "mirabile." 

Nel  delineare  quello  che  la  Bolzoni  ha  defmito,  con  espressione  assai  efficace 
r  "universo  dei  poemi  possibili,"  il  Patrizi  traccia  cosi  il  disegno  delle  "pro- 
prieta  della  possainza  de'  poeti,"  subito  ricondotto  ad  alcuni  "principi"  fon- 
damentali  (1'  "entusiasmo,"  la  "letizia,"  il  "dolore,"  lo  "sdegno"  e  lo  "scherzo"), 
considerati  come  "affetti  naturali"  che  1'  "arte"  o  "sesto  fonte"  della  poesia  deve 
adeguatamente  esprimere.^^  II  richiamo  a  questi  sentimenti  o  "moti"  essenzia- 
li,  quali  origini  di  ogni  esperienza  artistica,  e  esplicito  ed  evidente.  Ma  il  Pa- 
trizi non  dubita  che  le  "proprieta  poetiche"  siano  state  sinora  esposte  in  modo 
disordinato,  in  "un  confuso  raccolto"  divenuto  causa  di  errori  e  di  equivoci  di 
ogni  genere.  Sicche  ritiene  necessario  procedere  con  un'  "arte  metodica,"  ca- 
pace di  "restringerle"  a  "pochi  regolati  capi,"  secondo  dei  procedimenti  di  ca- 
rattere  "topico"  che  sono  comunemente  sviluppati  nella  trattatistica  "diailettica" 
e  "retorica"  del  tempo. 

E  questa  la  ragione  che  lo  induce  a  dedicare  a  tale  compito  la  parte  centrale 
della  "Deca  ammirabile,"^*  un  testo  composto  nella  primavera  del  1587,  con 
la  trasparente  intenzione  di  svolgere,  in  modo  sistematico,  le  idee  gia  pro- 
poste  nelle  "Deche"  precedents  Pero  il  fatto  piu  interessante  e  la  sua  affer- 
mazione  che  il  poeta  e,  insieme  "facitore  del  mirabile"  e  "mirabile  facitore"  e 
che,  d'altro  canto,  il  "mirabile"  puo  nascere  soltanto  dalla  "mescolanza"  delT 
"ordine  dei  credibili"  con  quello  degli  "incredibili."^^  Stabilisce,  pertanto,  subi- 
to, i  "dodici  fonti  della  mairaviglia"  ("ignoranza,"  "favola,"  "novita,"  "paradosso," 


CESARE  VASOLI  255 

"inngdzamento,"  "tramutamento  deU'usato,"  'Teccedente  la  natura,"  il  "divino," 
r  "utile  grande,"  V  "esattissimo,"  1'  "inaspettato"  e  il  "subito"),  per  risalire  alle 
"cagioni"  piu  lontane,  dalle  quali  dipende  I'intera  struttura  del  discorso  poe- 
tico.^^  Siffatti  principi,  consistono  nei  concetti  di  "necessario,"  "possibile,"  "av- 
venuto,"  "non  necessario,"  "impossibile"  e  in  quelli,  ad  essi  corrispondenti  di 
"vero,"  "verisimile,"  "non  avvenuto,"  "falso,"  "falsisimile."  Ma  giacche  tali  con- 
cetti "cadono,"  a  loro  volta,  nei  tre  diversi  "generi"  del  "divino,"  del  "naturale" 
e  deir  "umano"  (e  ciascuno  di  quel  "generi"  ha  le  proprie  "cagioni,"  "essenza," 
"potenza,"  "conoscenza,"  "volonta,"  "azione,"  "passione"  ed  "effetto,"  sempre 
nascenti  le  une  dalle  altre),  e  possibile  costruire  subito  una  trama  di  "loci"  della 
poesia  comprensibile  di  ogni  possibile  fonte  del  "mirabile  poetico"  e,  pertanto, 
di  ogni  sua  "invenzione."^^ 

II  filosofo  — che,  non  a  caso,  cita  Giulio  Camillo  Delminio^^  — vuole,  in- 
somnia, mostrare  come  si  debba  procedere  "per  arte"  alia  ricerca  del  "mira- 
bile,"  operando  "congiungimenti,"  "mescolamenti,"  "temperamenti," 
"coloramenti,"  "tinture"  e  "colture"  del  "credibile"  e  dell'  "incredibile"  che  sono, 
di  per  se  stessi,  quasi  infiniti.^^  Ma  si  tratta  soltanto  del  presupposto  di  un  dis- 
corso piij  complesso  svolto  nell'estate  stessa,  ed  affidato  alia  "Deca  plastica,"^^ 
un  testo  che  impegna  particolarmente  la  sottigliezza  mentale  e  la  erudizione 
e  la  filologia  del  Patrizi.  Questi,  infatti,  con  un  diretto  riferimento  alle  mitiche 
origini  della  poesia  greca  ed  ai  "cosmologi  e  profetici  poeti",  scrive  che  la  poe- 
sia puo  esser  fatta  di  cose  "vere"  e  di  "cose  false,"  oppure  di  cose  che  sono  "tram- 
bedue  mezzo."  Percio  la  poesia  potra  sempre  essere  formata  dei  "veri  trovati 
e  de'  veri  soggetti  di  scienze  e  di  arti  e  di  historia  e  di  civili  avvenimenti,"  purche 
queste  "materie"  siano  trattate  "con  finzioni  e  mirabilmente."^^  Non  solo:  per 
quanto  possa  sembrare  contradditorio  dire  che  "il  vero  si  possa  fingere,  che 
la  scienza,  testimone  della  verita,  si  mescoli  con  il  falso  e  che  la  storia  sia  anche 
favola,"  si  dovra  pure  ben  chiarire  la  differenza  che  corre  tra  "favola"  e  "fmzione" 
e  tra  "fmzione"  e  "verita."  Certo,  mai  il  "falso"  potra  essere  "vero";  ma  un  "par- 
lare"  umano  potra  essere,  in  qualche  sua  parte,  vero  o  falso  e,  tuttavia,  con- 
giungersi  rispettivamente  con  il  falso  e  con  il  vero,  temperandoli  e 
"mischiandoli,"  alio  scopo  di  creare  una  "fmzione"  che  non  e  necessariamente 
una  "favola. "^^ 


VI. 

II  "fmge re"  — scrive  il  Patrizi;  e  mi  pare  che  con  questa  frase  esprima  uno 
dei  temi  portanti  della  sua  dottrina  — e  "dar  ad  una  cosa  apparenza  e  forma 
diversa  da  quella  che  aveva  prima";  ma  se  il  "fingere"  e  un  "formare  o  tra- 
sformare"  sara  pure  un  "fare."  Ne  sara  disdicevole  che  il  poeta,  proprio  in 
quanto  "fattore"  o  "facitore,"  "formi  o  trasformi  la  materia  della  sua  prima  forma 
in  una  nuova"  che  abbia,  appunto,  carattere  "mirabile."^^  La  poesia  sarsi, 


256  *  LINGUAGGIO,   POESIA  E  MARAVIGLIA 

dunque,  una  "finzione"  di  questo  tipo,  volta  ad  ottenere  che  risorga  e  rinasca 
la  "maraviglia."  Eppure  il  poeta  non  potra  ignorare  —  come  il  filosofo  sotto- 
linea,  richiamandosi  al  tipico  motivo  platonico  ed  "ermetico"  dei  diversi  "li- 
velli"  di  comprensione  della  verita  —  che  esistono  cinque  differenti  modi  o  gradi 
di  "destinatari"  del  "discorso,"  dai  fanciulli  e  dalla  gente  che  e  a  loro  simile 
al  "vol go  ignorante,"  dalle  persone  che  sono  "di  mezzo  tra  sapere  e  non  sapere" 
agli  uomini  che  hanno  una  qualche  esperienza  di  dottrina,  sino  alia  specie, 
quasi  divina,  dei  "filosofanti."  Per  ogniuno  di  questi  "ordini"  diverso  e  il  modo 
di  intelligenza  delle  verita  "poetiche"  e  delle  fmzioni  che  le  rivestono;  e  la  poe- 
sia  sara  sempre  un  discorso  "cifrato,"  leggibile  secondo  "chiavi"  diverse,  un 
messaggio  differentemente  comprensibile  per  i  suoi  separati  e  distinti  "audi- 
tori.''^* 

Appunto  percio,  trattando  delle  varie  forme  della  fmzione  poetica,  il  Pa- 
trizi  si  sofferma,  soprattutto,  sul  "mito"  e  suUa  "favola,"  forma  enigmatica  che 
neppure  le  defmizioni  aristoteliche  e  le  discussioni  dei  commentatori  antichi 
e  moderni  hanno  ben  defmito;  e  conclude  affermando  che  la  "favola  poetica" 
e  essenzialmente  "un  parlar  fmto  o  una  fmzione  fatta  in  parola,"  il  cui  oggetto 
e  una  "historia  maravigliosa,"  oppure  "avvenimenti  maravigliosi,  o  sia  mi- 
rabili."''^  Non  dimentica,  pero,  la  stretta  connessione  tra  "fabula"  e  "allegoria," 
un  motivo  che  gli  permette  di  sviluppare  un'ampia  digressione  suUe  origini  della 
poesia,  sempre  iniziatiche,  sacrali  e  "teologali"  e  sulla  sua  natura  di  "mezzo" 
privilegiato  per  diffondere  le  verita  piu  arcane.  "Favole  misteriose"  furono, 
infatti,  le  antiche  teologie  dei  Greci,  dei  Caldei  e  dei  Fenici,  i  popoli  rivelatori 
di  quella  antichissima  sapienza  di  cui  il  Patrizi  si  considerava  "rinnovatore." 
Ma  anche  gli  Ebrei  pure  esposero  "per  via  di  allegorici  e  mistici  sensi"  la  verita 
mosaica,  cosi  come  i  Padri  cristiani  interpretarono  la  Scrittura  "con  sensi  mo- 
rali,  occulti  e  anagogici;"  e,  senza  dubbio,  le  "allegoric  delle  antiche  favole" 
espressero  "sentimenti  teologici  o  sentimenti  naturali  .  .  .  e  sensi  morali,"  di- 
venendo  le  "teologie,"  le  "fisiche"  e  le  "etiche"  di  un'umanita  che  ancora  viveva 
nel  "mirabile"  dell'immaginazione.^^ 

II  Patrizi  — che  ha  attaccato  cosi  duramente  il  canone  aristotelico  dell' 
"imitazione"  —  non  rinunzia,  tuttavia,  a  una  rigorosa  disciplina  retorica  che  de- 
termini  razionalmente  i  principi,  i  modelli  e  le  forme  dello  stesso  "mirabile" 
e  che  leghi  il  valore  "profetico"  o  addirittura  "sacrale"  dell'arte  alia  ricerca  di 
strumenti  espressivi  capaci  di  esprimerlo  in  un  discorso  coerente  e  "persua- 
sivo."  Egli  vuole  restituire  al  linguaggio  il  suo  potere  originario:  la  facolta  di 
generare  un  nuovo  universo  "mirabile,"  istituito  dalla  potenza  fantastica  del- 
I'immaginazione,  ma  che,  nondimeno,  risponda  alle  norme  di  una  "logica  poe- 
tica," capace  di  "formare"  le  realta  iscritte  nel  dominio  fantastico  del 
"maraviglioso."  E  si  comprende  come  una  teoria  della  poesia  cosi  volta  verso 
r  "arcano"  e  il  "profetico"  possa  gia  preannunziare  il  ritorno  di  quella  filosofia 
antica  ma  "nuovissima"  che  la  Nova  de  universis  philosophia'^  proporra  come 
estremo  rimedio  alia  lacerazione  intellettuale  e  religiosa  del  suo  secolo.  Con- 


CESARE  VASOLI  257 

vinto  che  i  tempi  siano  maturi  perche  riemerga  un  sapere  "divino"  e  la  parola 
sia  riscattata  dalla  sua  lunga  decadenza  il  Patrizi  si  avvia  cosi  verso  la  sua 
ultima  e  piu  drammatica  esperienza,  conclusa  — com'era  inevitabile  —  dalla  con- 
danna  della  Congregazione  dell'Indice,  i  cui  censori  valutarono  lucidamente 
I'intima  forza  eversiva  di  una  dottrina  che  restituiva  a  filosofi  e  poeti  il  do- 
minio  della  "maraviglia."^^ 

Universita  di  Firenze  (Italia) 


Note 


1 .  Per  la  ricca  bibliografia  relativa  al  Patrizi  rinvio  alle  indicazioni  fornite  da  L.  Bol- 
zoni,  L'universo  dei  poemi  possibili.  Studi  su  Francesco  Patrizi  da  Cherso,  Roma,  1980,  e  da 
chi  scrive  in  Immagini  umanistiche ,  Napoli,  1983,  pp.  457-458,  590.  Ma  cfr.  anche:  C. 
Vasoli,  Linguaggio,  retorica  e  potere  secondo  Francesco  Patrizi,  in  Le  pouvoir  et  la  plume.  In- 
citation,  controle  et  repression  dans  I'ltalie  du  XVF  siecle,  Paris,  1982,  pp.  285-300;  id.,  Fran- 
cesco Patrizi  and  the  "Double  rhetoric,"  in  "New  Literary  History,"  XIV  (1982-1983),  pp. 
539-551 ;  id. ,  Schede  patriziane  sul  "De  sublime, "  in  //  sublime.  Contributi  per  la  storia  di  un'i- 
dea.  Studi  in  onore  di  Giuseppe Martano ,  Napoli,  1983,  pp.  161-174;  id.,  Aristotele e  i filosofi 
"antiquiores,  "in  "Atti  e  memorie  dell'Accademia  Petrarca  di  Lettere,  Arti  e  Scienze,"  N.S. , 
XLIV(1981),  Arezzo,  1983,  pp.  205-233;  ID.,  Le  teorie  del  Delminio  e  del  Patrizi  e  i  trat- 
tatisti  d'arte  fra  '500  e  '600,  in  Cultura  e  societd  nel  Rinascimento  tra  Riforme  e  manierismi,  a 
cura  di  V.  Branca  e  C.  Ossola,  Firenze,  1984,  pp.  249-270;  A.  Antonaci,  Ricerche  sul 
neoplatonismo  del  Rinascimento.  Francesco  Patrizi  da  Cherso,  I. La  redazione  delle  operefilosofiche. 
Analisi  del primo  tomo  delle  "Discus siones,  "Galatina,  1984;  C.  Vasoli,  Una  lettera  di  Francesco 
Patrizi  e  un  processo  per  eresia  a  Venezia.  1562-1563,  in  "Atti  e  memorie  dell'Accademia  toscana 
di  Scienze  e  Lettere  'La  Colombaria,"  L,  N.S.,  XXXVI  (1985),  Firenze,  1985,  pp. 
209-245;  ID.,  /  "Dialoghi  della  Historia" di  Francesco  Patrizi.  Prime  considerazioni,  in  Culture 
et  societe  en  Italie  du  Moyen-Age  a  la  Renaissance.  Hommage  a  Andre  Rochon,  Paris,  1985, 
pp.  329-352. 

2.  Cfr.  soprattutto,  a  questo  proposito,  F.A.  Yates,  Giordano  Bruno  and  the  Hermetic 
Tradition,  London,  1964,  ad  ind. 

3.  Mi  permetto  di  rinviare  a  quanto  ho  scritto  in  Immagini  umanistiche,  cit. ,  pp.  573  ss. 

4.  A  proposito  di  questa  condanna  e  della  letteratura  relativa,  cfr.  principalmente, 
A.  Rotondo,  Cultura  umanistica  e  difficoltd  di  censori.  Censura  ecclesiastica  e  discussioni  cin- 
quecentesche  sul  platonismo,  in  Le  pouvoir  et  la  plume,  cit.,  pp.  15-50. 

5.  Di  M.  Francesco  |  PATRIZIO  |  La  cittdf slice.  Del  medesimo,  Dialogo  \  Dell'honore, 
il  Barignano.  |  Del  medesimo,  Discorso  |  Della  diversita  de'  furori  poetici.  Lettura  sopra 
il  sonetto  del  Petrarca:  La  gola  e  '1  sonno,  e  I'otiose  piume,  In  Venetia,  per  Giovan 
Griffio  MDLIII. 

6.  Cfr.,  a  questo  proposito,  Vasoli,  /  "Dialoghi  della  Historia,^  cit. 

7.  Cfr.  L.  Bolzoni,  L'Accademia  Veneziana:  splendore  e  decadenza  di  una  Utopia  enciclope- 
dica,  in  Universita,  Accademie  a  societd  scientifiche  in  Italia  e  in  Germania  dal  Cinquecento  al 
Settecento,  a  cura  di  L.  Boehm  e  E.  Raimondi,  Bologna,  1981,  pp.  117-167. 

8.  La  cittdfelico,  cit.,  c.  46 v. 


258  LINGUAGGIO,    POESIA   E  MARAVIGLIA 


9.  Ibid.,  c.  49r. 

10.  Ibid.,  cc.  49v-50r. 

11.  Ibid.,  cc.  50 V  ss. 

12.  Ibid.,  cc.  55r  ss. 

13.  Delia  Historia  \  diece  dialoghi  \  di  M..  Francesco  PATRITIO  |  ne'quali  si  ragiona  di 
tutte  le  CO  I  se  appartenenti  aWhistoria,  et  alio  scriverla,  et  alVosservarla  \  Con  gratia,  et  Privilegio 
per  anni  X,  In  Venetia,  Appresso  Andrea  |  Arrivabene  |  MDLX. 

14.  Francesco  PATRIZIO  |  Delia  Retorica  \  Died  dialoghi,  \  nelli  quali  si  favella  \  dell'arte 
oratoria  \  con  ragioni  repugnanti  \  all'openione  che  intorno  a  quella  \  hebbero  gli  antichi  scrittori. 
In  Venetia  |  per  Francesco  Senese,  MDLXII. 

15.  Cfr.  ancora,  Vasoli,  /  "Dialoghi  della  Historia,"  cit. 

16.  Della  Historia,  cc.  12r  ss. 

17.  Ibid.,  cc.  24v  ss. 

18.  Ibid.,  c.  A  2r. 

19.  Ibid.,  cc.  Ir  ss. 

20.  Cfr.  I Daloghi  di  Mes-  |  ser  Speron  |  SPERONE,  In  Vinegia  |  in  casa  de'figliuoli 
di  Aldo  I  MDXLIII. 

21.  Cfr.  Francisci  |  ROBORTELLI  |  Utinensis  |  De historicafacultate,  disputatio  \  ...Flo- 
rentiae  apud  Laurentium  Torrentinum  |  Mense  lulio  MDXLVIII. 

22.  Cfr.  Vasoli,  /  "Dialoghi  della  Historia;'  cit.,  pp.  344  ss. 

23.  Cfr.,  in  particolare,  G.  Cotroneo,  I trattatisti dell' "Ars  historica,"  Napoli,  1971,  p.  217. 

24.  Cfr.  Della  Historia,  cit.,  cc.  15v  ss. 

25.  Ibid.,  cc.  17r-v. 

26.  Ibid.,  c.  12v. 

27.  Ibid.,  c.  14r. 

28.  Ibid.,  c.  14v. 

29.  Ibid.,  cc.  14v-15r. 

30.  Ibid.,  cc.  19v-24r. 

31.  Ibid.,  cc.  24v-30r.  A  proposito  del  Contile,  cfr.  R.  Scrivano,  Un  momento  della 
lirica  cinquecentesca.  Luca  Contile,  in  "La  Rassegna  della  Letteratura  italiana,"  LXXI  (1958), 
pp.  201-207,  poi,  col  titolo  Luca  Contile  e  Francesco  Patrizi,  in  Cultura  e  letteratura  nel  Cin- 
quencento,  Roma,  1966,  pp.  183-194  e  1'  Introduzione  di  A.  Quondam  all'edizione  de 
Le  "Rime  cristiane"  di  Luca  Contile,  in  "Atti  e  memorie  dell'Arcadia,"  S.III,  VI  (1974), 
pp.  171-184. 

32.  Della  Historia,  cit.,  c.  24v. 

33.  Ibid.,  cc  25r-26v. 

34.  Crf.  Della  Retorica,  cit.,  cc.  43 r- v. 

35.  Della  Historia,  cit.  cc.  27r-v. 

36.  Ibid.,  c.  28r. 

37.  Ibid.,  c.  28r-v. 

38.  Ibid.,  c.  28v. 

39.  Della  Retorica,  cit.  c.  Iv. 

40.  Penso,  soprattutto,  ai  noti  testi  di  Encomion  moriae,  3. 

41.  Della  Retorica,  cc.  4v-5r. 

42.  Ibid.,  cc.  5v-7r. 

43.  Ibid.,  cc.  4r  ss. 

44.  Ibid.,  c.  7r. 

45.  Ibid.,  cc.  7r-v. 

46.  Ibid.,  c.  7v. 


CESARE  VASOLI 


259 


47.  Ibid.,  cc.  7v-8r. 

48.  Ibid.,  cc.  8v  ss. 

49.  Ibid.,  cc. 

50.  Cfr.  Vasoli,  Linguaggio,  retorica,  potere,  cit. 

51.  Delia  Retorica,  cit.,  cc  12v-13r. 

52.  Francisci  Patritii  Discussionum  peripaieticarum  tomi  quattuor  quibus  Aristotelicae  Phi- 
losophiae  universa  Historia  atque  Dogmata  cum  Veterum  Placitis  collata,  eleganter  et  erudite  de- 
clarantur,  Basileae,  ad  Pernam  Lecythum,  MDLXXXI  (ma  il  primo  tomo  era  gia  stato 
edito  a  Venezia,  nel  1571:  Discussionum  peripaieticarum  tomi  I  libri  XIII,  Venetiis,  apud 
Dominicum  de  Franciscis,  MDLXXI). 

53.  Delia  Retorica,  cit.,  cc.  49v. 

54.  Ibid.,  cc.  49 V  ss. 

55.  Ibid.,  cc.  60r-v. 

56.  Ibid.,  c.  61r. 

57.  Cfr.  Francesco  Patrizi,  Delia poetica.  Edizione  critica  a  cura  di  D.  Aguzzi-Barbagli, 
I,  Firenze,  1969;  II,  Ibid.,  1970;  III,  Ibid.,  1971. 

58.  Ibid.,  I,  pp.  7-28. 

59.  Ibid.,  I,  pp.  187-188.  Ma  il  Patrizi  aggiunge  che  le  poesie  possono  anche  essere 
"composte"  "o  di  divina  e  di  naturale,  o  di  divina  e  di  umana,  o  di  umana  e  di  naturale, 
o  di  tutte  e  tre  insieme  giunte,  divina,  naturale  e  umana." 

60.  Ibid.,  II,  pp.  7  ss. 

61.  Cfr.  Marsili  Ficini  Florentini  .  .  .  opera  et  quae  hactenus  extitere,  Basileae,  ex  Of- 
ficina  Henricpetrina,  MDLXI,  f.  1361. 

62.  Delia  Poetica,  cit.,  II,  pp.  31-32. 

63.  Ibid.,  pp.  239-246. 

64.  Ibid.,  pp.  233-368. 

65.  Ibid.,  pp.  271-310. 

66.  Ibid.,  pp.  311-327. 

67.  Cfr.  Ibid,  il  diagramma  dopo  p.  314. 

68.  A  proposito  di  Giulio  Camillo  Delminio,  rinvio  alia  indicazioni  bibliografiche 
fomite  da  L.  Bolzoni,  Ilteatro  della  memoria.  Studisu  Giulio  Camillo  Delminio,  Padova,  1984. 

69.  Della  Poetica,cit.,  II,  pp.  319-320. 

70.  Ibid.,  Ill,  pp.  3-131. 

71.  Ibid.,  pp.  14-15. 

72.  Ibid.,  pp.  17-26. 

73.  Ibid.,  pp.  23-24. 

74.  Ibid.,  pp.  24-26. 

75.  Ibid.,  pp.  37-53. 

76.  Ibid.,  pp.  57-68. 

77.  Cfr.  Francisci  Patritii  Nova  de  universis  philosophia,  in  qua  aristotelica  methodo  ad pri- 
mam  causam  ascenditur,  deinde  nova  ac  peculiari  methodo  platonica  rerum  universitas  a  conditore 
Deo  deducitur  .  .  .,  Ferrariae,  ex  typog.  Benedicti  Mammarellae,  1591. 

78.  Cfr.  n.  4. 


Grotius's  Drama  on  Joseph  in  Egypt 
in  the  Tradition  of  the  Theme 

Arthur  Eyffinger 

La  plus  belle  des  histoires,"  the  fairest  of  all  stories,  are  words  taken 
from  the  Koran,  the  twelfth  sura,  and  introduce  the  story  of  Joseph 
the  Patriarch.^  Few  tales  have  broken  their  way  into  as  many  cul- 
tures as  did  the  story  of  Joseph.  And  few  can  claim  to  have  appealed,  through 
the  ages,  to  as  many  artists  in  both  the  literary  and  the  visual  arts.  The  theme 
of  Jacob's  dearest  son  has  captivated  such  various  talents  as  Firdousi  and  Von- 
del,  Macropedius  and  Thomas  Mann,  Ghiberti  and  Rembrandt.  The  story 
of  Joseph's  life  has  been  sung  in  epics  and  hymns,  included  in  a  triptych  of 
plays,  and  presented  in  a  sequence  of  novels.  It  has  been  depicted  on  frescoes 
in  the  Roman  catacombs,  on  the  mosaics  of  San  Marco,  in  the  wood- work 
of  the  Maximian-cathedra  at  Ravenna.  It  inspired  the  miniaturists  of  a  Vien- 
nese manuscript,  was  embroidered  in  Coptic  hangings,  chased  in  the  baptis- 
try at  Florence,  vitrified  in  Ghartres,  petrified  in  Vezelay,  and  carved  into  ivory 
at  Sens.^ 

Clearly,  the  spell  of  the  Genesis-narrative  accounts  for  many  of  these  ar- 
tistic outpourings.  Man  has  always  been  fascinated  by  the  tragedy  of  the  pit 
at  Dothan,  the  seduction  scene  with  the  wife  of  Potiphar,  the  wronged  inno- 
cence, the  prophecies  from  the  dungeon,  the  love-  story  with  fair  Asnethe,  and 
the  reconciliation  of  the  brothers  at  Memphis.  Or,  as  Goethe  puts  it  in  Dich- 
tung  und  Wahrheit  (1.4):  "Hochst  anmutig  ist  diese  natiirlichte  Erzahlung,  nur 
erscheint  sie  zu  kurz,  und  man  fiihlt  sich  berufen,  sie  ins  Einzelne  auszu- 
malen."^  The  artists  stressed  the  esthetic  element,  as  did  Firdousi  who  trans- 
formed the  sobre  and  austere  narrative  of  the  Koran  into  a  heroic  epic  Yusuf 
and  Zuleicha,  or  the  ancient  Jewish  author  from  Egyptian  extraction  who  wrote 
the  highly  popular  mystical  novel  on  Joseph  and  Asnethe.'^ 

But  the  mission  of  Joseph's  life  has  also  been  deemed  a  perfect  frame  for 
moralization  and  allegory,  and  has  been  regarded  as  a  mirror  of  life.  It  is  this, 
the  ethical  element,  which  has  always  prevailed  in  Western  culture,  for,  de- 
spite its  undisputable  charms,  it  has  patently  not  been  the  esthetic  element  that 


262  GROTIUS'   DRAMA  ON  JOSEPH   IN   EGYPT 

warranted  the  diffusion  of  the  Joseph  story  in  Europe.  The  cradle  of  Western 
tradition  was  the  bibhcfil  exegesis  by  Alexandrian  scholars,  who  were  wont  to 
interpret  the  Old  Testament  in  the  perspective  of  the  New:  le  miroir  devoile. 
This  interpretation  dominates  the  scene  for  centuries,  from  the  triple  exegesis 
on  the  literal,  moral  and  mystical  level  (on  the  analogy  of  body,  mind,  and 
soul),  as  found  in  the  works  of  Origen,  Tertullian  and  Jerome,  to  the  scho- 
lastic canon  of  quadruple  interpretation  including:  a  historical  level  (which  deals 
with  facts  only),  an  allegorical  level  (aimed  at  the  prefiguring  element),  a  trop- 
ological  level  (which  addresses  itself  to  the  moralizing  aspect),  and  fmally,  an 
anagogical  level  (so  as  to  explore  the  mystical  aspects  of  Revelation).  Through 
Isidore,  the  Venerable  Bede,  and  Alcuin,  this  school  reaches  its  zenith  a  mil- 
lenium  later,  in  the  thirteenth  century.^  Steeped  in  scholasticism,  this  line  also 
asserted  itself  in  French  mystery  plays  or  the  Heidelberg  Passion,  in  order  to  fmally 
influence  sixteenth-century  school-drama.  A  major  part  in  this  tradition  was 
generally  allotted  to  the  idea  of  the  Joseph  character  as  prefiguring  the  Christ  — 
for  He  too  was  driven  from  his  native  soil,  and  betrayed  and  sold  by  his 
kindred  —  while  Joseph's  elevation  from  pit  and  dungeon  was  considered  the 
perfect  counterpart  of  crucifixion  and  resurrection.  Joseph's  wife  Asnethe  rep- 
resented the  Holy  Church,  whereas  Potiphar's  wife  pictured  the  Synagogue. 

Still,  at  least  three  other  interpretations  of  the  Joseph  episode  found  elo- 
quent expression  in  European  literature.  Possibly  the  most  sophisticated  and 
most  comprehensive  study  ever  attempted  was  made  by  Thomas  Mann,  to 
whom  the  Joseph  saga  represents  "Eine  Psychologie  des  mythischen  Bewust- 
seins,  in  dem  das  principium  individuationis  noch  durch  kollektive,  archaische 
Verhaltensmuster  bestimmt  und  dirigiert  wird."  Critics  have  interpreted  this 
work  in  the  light  of  Mann's  "nach  der  Beendigung  des  Zauberbergs  (1924)  sich 
immer  deutlicher  herausbildenden  umfassenden  Intention,  den  Schritt  vom 
'biirgerlich-individuellen'  zum  mythisch-typischen  zu  tun,  jene  Brunnentiefe 
der  Zeiten  auszuloten,  wo  der  Mythus  zu  Hause  ist  und  die  Urnormen,  Ur- 
formen  des  Lebens  griindet."^ 

Unlike  Thomas  Mann,  however,  most  authors  contented  themselves  with 
emphasizing  a  single  point  and,  to  this  end,  lifted  a  specific  episode  from  the 
organic  whole  of  the  Genesis-narrative.  For  instance  to  the  Dutch  seventeenth- 
century  author  Jacob  Cats,  Joseph  is  the  very  soul  of  virtue  and  chastity.  In 
his  Selfstryt,  the  story  of  Joseph  and  Sephyra  is  interpreted  in  the  light  of  man's 
internal  struggle  in  dealing  with  the  dualism  of  carnal  and  mental  impulses.^ 
His  poem  is  also  interpreted  by  modern  critics  in  the  perspective  of  Cat's  own 
sexual  dilemma  and  the  prevailing  morals  of  his  day.^  Interestingly  enough, 
a  very  similar  view  on  the  Joseph  theme  is  found  in  the  Kamp  tusschen  Kuysheyd 
en  Geylheyd  (Battle  of  the  pure  and  the  lascivious)  by  the  well-known  playwright 
and  contemporary  of  Cats,  Joost  van  den  Vondel.  Here  Joseph  is  put  on  the 
same  level  with  Susanna,  Lucretia,  and  Daphne.^ 

A  third  interpretation  that  is  noteworthy  here  is  that  of  Joseph  as  the  ideal 


ARTHUR   EYFFINGER  263 

regent  and  politician.  It  is  here  that  we  meet  Hugo  Grotius.  Hugo  Grotius, 
known  today  mostly  for  his  works  in  the  fields  of  international  law  and  theol- 
ogy, was  also  once  a  celebrated  playwright.  He  had  written  two  biblical  dra- 
mas, on  the  themes  of  Adam  and  Eve  and  Christ's  Passion  before  beginning 
to  work,  after  an  interval  of  over  25  years,  on  the  theme  of  Joseph  in  Egypt. 
The  name  of  the  play  Sophompaneas  stems  from  the  rather  puzzling  name  or 
title  given  to  Joseph  in  Egypt  (Sapham  Panach),  which  is  generally  considered 
to  mean  something  like  Salvator  Mundi.  ^^  But  in  Grotius's  work  there  is  adso 
the  connotation  of  the  Greek  aoqjoi;,  and  in  the  play  frequent  references  to  both 
interpretations  can  be  found. 

Like  the  various  interpretations  of  the  Joseph  tale  discussed  above,  Grotius's 
view  on  the  story  is  firmly  based  on  classical  sources.  In  fact,  the  idea  of  the 
ideal  regent  is  a  mainstream  of  tradition  and  goes  all  the  way  back  to  Philo 
Judaeus,  a  major  authority  in  the  field. ^^  As  was  Philo's  wont  in  all  his  dead- 
ings  with  biblical  material,  a  basically  allegorical  exegesis  of  the  Genesis  ep- 
isode is  presented  in  his  tract  De  Josepho.  To  Philo,  Joseph  in  his  successive 
functions  of  shepherd,  major  domus,  and  viceroy  is  the  representative  in 
micro-  and  macro-cosmos  of  the  pious  and  upright  regent,  th^  pater  patriae,  mind- 
ful of  the  interests  of  his  herd.  Thus  the  story  in  his  interpretation  reads  as 
a  Furstenspiegel. 

Now,  oddly  enough,  and  in  spite  of  several  editions  of  Philo's  text  from  1527 
onwards,  this  idea  never  really  came  across  to  sixteenth-century  dramatists. 
As  Lebeau  points  out,  not  one  of  the  well  over  thirty  German  schoolmasters, 
or  for  that  matter  the  two  dozen  Jesuits  who  dwelled  on  the  theme  specifically, 
betrays  any  substantial  influences  apart  from  Genesis  other  than  the  two  major 
classical  sources  at  our  disposal.  These  are,  first,  Flavius  Josephus  (Jewish 
Antiquities)  — to  whom  several  otherwise  unknown  incidents  of  the  plot  go  back, 
such  as  Reuben's  interference  at  the  pit,  Judah's  pleading  Benjamin's  cause 
with  the  viceroy,  or  for  that  matter  the  very  dialogue  of  Joseph  and 
Sephyra^^  — and,  second,  the  Testament  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs,  a  set  of  morzd 
codes  that  put  their  stamp  on  the  public  conscience  of  Palestine  Jewry  and  in 
which  Joseph  of  old  played  a  major  role.^^ 

Still,  Philo's  exegesis  based  on  Genesis  50:20,  in  which  Joseph  puts  all  the 
credit  and  the  blame  for  what  occurred  to  him  on  the  hidden  ways  of  the  Lord, 
is  in  the  best  of  traditions.  This  passage  virtually  dominates  his  conduct  in  re- 
gards to  his  brothers  all  along  and  has  therefore  always  been  considered  cru- 
cial to  the  story  and  typical  of  the  Old  Testament.  Joseph,  who  takes  a  position 
all  his  own  amid  the  Patriarchs  —  for  unlike  his  forebears,  brothers,  and  chil- 
dren, he  was,  if  admittedly  chosen,  certainly  not  "blessed."  In  him  the  tra- 
dition of  personal  contact  with  Jehovah  runs  dry.  He  marks  the  end  of  all 
theophany.  To  him  Jehovah  speaks  through  visions  only.  He  is  a  visionary 
figure,  committed  to  a  mission,  yet  in  a  profane  way.  His  mission  bears  a  bas- 
ically temporary  character  and  is  of  an  essentially  political  nature.  According 


264  *  GROTIUS'  DRAMA  ON  JOSEPH   IN   EGYPT 

to  critics,  therefore,  he  typifies  the  ideal  statesman,  who  compensates  the  loss 
of  direct  approach  to  God  by  human  conscience  and  inborn  nobility.  His  wis- 
dom is  like  a  "glimmering"  of  Jehovah's  Almightiness,  the  feeble  reflection  of 
the  Eternal  Light. 

Significantly  enough,  it  is  to  Philo's  tract  that  Grotius  refers  in  his  highly 
interesting  Dedicatory  Letter  on  Sophompaneas  to  his  intimate  G.  J.  Vossius,  the 
Amsterdam  polyhistor.^*  In  the  "vestibule"  of  his  Sacred  Laws,  Philo  stated, 
Moses  portrayed  three  outstanding  types  of  men  after  whom  people  should 
model  their  private  lives,  namely  Abraham  as  the  model  of  knowledge,  {math- 
esis),  Isaac  as  the  way  to  virtue  by  natural  endowments  (phusis),  and  Jacob  as 
the  embodiment  of  asceticism  (askesis).  But  in  fact,  Philo  argues,  Moses  had 
in  mind  to  add  another  example,  namely  Joseph,  the  man  of  public  authority 
and  profitable  to  the  common  interest,  "very  unlike"  — as  Grotius  adds  — "the 
common  picture  of  a  ruler  as  a  man  who  is  made  up  of  cunning  and  deceit, 
perfidious  towards  God  and  man  alike." 

Whereas  sixteenth-century  playwrights  (most  of  them  schoolmasters  and 
pedagogues),  used  to  write  "ad  Christiani  iuventutis  institutionem,"  Grotius 
rather  seems  to  have  had  in  mind  the  "Institutio  Principis  Christiani"  in  the 
Erasmian  spirit.  The  very  structure  of  Grotius's  play,  as  compared  to  those 
of  his  predecessors,  is  symptomatic  of  his  quite  different  approach.  Whereas 
the  schoolmasters  faithfully  echoed  the  sequence  of  paragraphs  from  Genesis 
in  chronological  order,  Grotius  right  from  the  start  focuses  on  a  single  issue: 
the  trial  of  Benjamin  — and  this  from  the  point  of  view  of  Joseph  only.  This 
is  not  to  say  that  the  subject  matter  of  the  play  is  limited,  for  in  a  rather 
ingenious  and  artistically  convincing  manner,  Grotius  succeeds  in  weaving 
nearly  all  episodes  of  the  tale  into  his  narrative.  In  fact  he  does  a  lot  more  than 
that.  In  the  truly  humanistic  manner,  that  is  by  opening  wide  horizons,  many 
chapters  from  the  history  of  Salvation  are  inserted  in  retrospect  or  in 
anticipation,  and  this  with  full  respect  of  the  unities  of  plot,  time,  and 
place. 

Joseph,  needless  to  say,  is  the  protagonist  and  main  character  of  the  play. 
But  interestingly  enough,  he  has  nothing  whatever  of  the  suffering  martyr,  that 
lent  such  force  and  charm  to  his  title-role  in  so  many  sixteenth-century  school- 
dramas.  On  the  contrary,  he  is  the  unchallenged  princeps.  In  fact  it  is  Grotius's 
idea  in  which  he  singles  out  a  specific  day  in  the  life  of  the  viceroy,  that  pre- 
conditions the  interrelationship  with  the  other  major  characters,  in  casu  his 
brothers.  Joseph  in  this  play  is  sovereign  throughout,  and  he  is  given  second 
sight;  therefore,  he  can  never  become  a  truly  tragic  character.  The  martyr- 
dom has  been  reserved  for  Benjamin,  the  only  one  of  the  brothers  to  be  in- 
nocent of  the  incident  at  Dothan  and  seemingly  selected  to  bear  the 
consequences  of  Joseph's  revenge.  An  interesting  point,  therefore,  is  that  Gro- 
tius, while  framing  this  plot,  did  not  really  bother  to  portray  the  character  of 
Benjamin.  In  fact  the  youngster  is  all  but  a  persona  muta,  very  much  resem- 


ARTHUR  EYFFINGER  265 

bling  the  Astyanax-character  of  Seneca's  Troades.  Neither  have  the  characters 
of  Pharaoh  or  Asnethe,  Joseph's  wife,  been  portrayed  in  depth. 

There  are  only  two  antagonists  proper:  Reuben  and  Judzih,  and  any  critical 
comments  have  been  put  in  the  mouth  of  a  chorus  of  Ethiopian  girls,  Asnethe's 
maid-servants.  But  even  Reuben  and  Judah  are  in  no  position  to  challenge 
Joseph.  They  are  like  beggars,  driven  to  the  Egyptian  court  from  sheer  famine 
and  visited  — as  they  see  it  — by  successive  strokes  of  misfortune:  first  the  in- 
cident of  the  money  accidentally  left  in  their  bags,  and  then  the  inexplicable 
incident  of  the  cup.  Then,  Reuben,  left  behind  as  a  hostage  in  the  wake  of 
the  first  journey,  had  ample  occasion  to  observe  the  viceroy's  civil  wisdom  and 
had  come  to  appreciate  his  prophetic  eye.  Therefore,  from  the  very  start  they 
know  they  are  indeed  no  match  for  him.  They  are  given  no  weapons  to  defend 
themselves;  they  have  no  case  whatever  to  plead.  On  top  of  that,  when  plead- 
ing not  guilty  to  the  framed  charges,  they  are  reminded  first  by  Pharaoh,  then 
by  the  viceroy  himself  that  ill-luck,  if  indeed  inexplicable,  must  be  accounted 
for  by  God's  revenge  to  counterbalance  sins  committed  in  the  past.  This  in- 
stantly reminds  them  of  the  Dothan  incident,  and,  being  well  aware  of  the  vice- 
roy's second  sight,  they  wonder  whether  he  might  not  know  more  than  he  allows 
them  to  see,  and  so,  as  the  play  rolls  on,  they  get  more  and  more  panic-stricken. 

It  is  here  we  reach  the  core  of  the  play,  the  confrontation  of  characters.  On 
the  one  hand,  there  are  the  brothers,  whom  we  know  abused  their  power  over 
their  brother  at  Dothan,  and  who  once  were  induced  by  jealousy  to  lose  sight 
of  nature's  dearest  unwritten  law,  the  love  of  one's  kindred.  They  are  now  put 
at  the  mercy  of  an  apparently  harsh  character  who  is  in  full  right,  in  the  po- 
sition, and  is  seemingly  very  willing  to  use  his  legal  power  to  their  destruction, 
but  who,  however,  somehow  prefers  to  hurt  them  to  the  quick  by  selecting  their 
helpless  brother,  whom  they  know  to  be  innocent  of  the  Dothan  affair.  Utterly 
helpless  in  human  terms  and  in  no  position  to  claim  mercy  from  God,  they 
can  but  sit  and  wait.  And  this  is  exactly  what  they  do,  to  the  detriment  of  dra- 
matic action,  but  with  the  unmistakable  increase  of  suspense.  For  Grotius  has 
indeed  taken  pains  to  insert  all  sorts  of  side-issues  that  do  not  fail  to  have  their 
alarming  impact  on  the  brothers.  At  first  sight  these  lenghty  interruptions  of 
dramatic  action  may  seem  of  little  importance  to  the  plot  and  the  trial  proper. 
But  they  ultimately  serve  to  build  up  the  portrait  of  the  stern  but  fair  ruler 
intent  on  teaching  his  brothers  a  lesson  for  their  own  benefit. 

In  this  portrayal  Grotius  uses  a  set  of  well-known  literary  themes.  In  the 
prologue,  Joseph,  in  obvious  references  to  Seneca's  Oedipus,  is  pondering  over 
the  heavy  burdens  that  come  with  his  position,  inserting  comparisons  with  the 
humble  shepherd  and  the  helmsman:  the  ship  of  state  is  tossed  on  the  gales 
of  social  disturbance  by  prolonged  famine.  Familiar  themes  like  jealousy,  re- 
venge, and  leniency  are  touched  upon,  and  in  the  personal  address  to  his  son, 
Manasse,  on  piety  as  the  governing  principle  of  politics,  we  may  presume  Gro- 
tius's  own  tenets  from  all  we  know  of  his  works  in  this  field. 


266  '  GROTIUS'  DRAMA  ON  JOSEPH   IN  EGYPT 

The  play  is  embellished  by  all  sorts  of  literary  devices,  for  instance:  time 
and  again  Grotius  uses  dramatic  irony  to  make  his  point.  In  reply  to  Judah's 
pointing  out  the  absurdities  of  the  fabricated  charge,  Ramses  (as  said  above) 
suggests  the  postponed  revenge  of  a  disturbed  Deity  to  account  for  their  vis- 
itation. This  does  not  fail  to  rouse  Judah's  fears,  and  in  perfect  Senecan  dis- 
tributio,  he  anticipates  the  various  forms  of  misery  that  may  await  Benjamin. 
These  actually  run  parallel  to  the  afflictions  that  occurred  to  Joseph  years  before. 
The  scene  closes  with  another  ironical  note,  Judah  praising  Joseph's  fortune  — 
for  dead  or  alive  he  will  at  least  not  share  their  present  misery.  Likewise,  in 
the  third  act,  on  arriving  at  the  Court  Hall  the  brothers  spot  a  picture  gallery, 
showing  frescoes  illustrating  themes  from  the  viceroy's  life,  a  very  ingenious 
device  on  Grotius's  part  and  clearly  modelled  after  Vergil's  Aeneid.  There  is 
a  difference,  however.  Aeneas  on  his  arrival  at  Carthage  is  confronted  with 
a  temple  showing  the  scenes  from  his  life  without  his  hosts  knowing  it.  The 
brothers  peruse  the  scenes  which  successively  portray  the  seduction,  the  dream- 
interpretations,  and  Joseph's  social  reforms  in  Egypt,  etc.,  without  their  re- 
alizing the  import  of  these  scenes  to  their  own  case.  On  their  approaching  the 
fourth  side  of  the  gallery  and  the  fmal  wall  depicting  the  future  of  the  viceroy's 
life,  which  still  lies  hidden  in  darkness  to  the  Egyptians,  they  are  about  to  fmd 
out  their  own  part  in  the  story.  Before  the  discovery,  however,  they  are  timely 
summoned  to  the  Court  Hall  to  attend  the  trial. 

Another  example  occurs  in  the  final  episodes  after  the  denouement:  Joseph 
claims  pasture- grounds  and  autonomy  in  matters  of  morals  and  religion  for 
his  family.  Pharaoh  is  only  too  glad  to  grant  these  favours,  swearing  a  solemn 
oath,  which  if  infringed  (as  he  predicts),  will  bring  utter  disaster  on  the  tres- 
passer, whereupon  follows  the  catalogue  of  the  plagues  from  the  day  of  Moses 
in  a  vaticinatio  post  eventum.  To  this  Joseph  replies  by  predicting  rich  blessings 
for  Egypt  from  its  harbouring  of  Jehovah's  Chosen  Ones.  In  this  he  adroitly 
refers  to  Solomon's  Egyptian  bride,  the  later  diaspora,  Jesus's  flight  into  Egypt, 
and  the  ultimate  unification  of  both  nations  under  God's  law  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. Thus,  not  unlike  in  his  two  earlier  plays,  Adamus  Exul{\60\)  and  Christus 
Patiens  (1608),  Grotius  concludes  in  a  truly  religious  tone,  herewith  placing 
the  Joseph  theme  in  the  much  wider  perspective  of  God's  Ordinance. 

The  choruses  of  Sophompaneas,  as  is  typical  of  lyrics  in  Neolatin  tragedy,  do 
not  reflect  on  the  particulars  of  previous  scenes,  but  tend  to  lift  the  central  mo- 
tives of  the  play  to  a  philosophical  level,  dwelling  on  the  theme  in  lyrical  out- 
pouring. In  this,  Grotius's  personal  phrasings  are  flavoured  by  echoes  from 
Seneca's  plays,  Prudentius'  hymns,  or  Boethius's  Consolatio.  The  last  chorus, 
for  instance,  embarks  on  a  eulogy  of  Joseph's  native  lands  in  Mesopotamia, 
recreates  the  scene  of  God's  creation,  and  commenting  on  nuptial  and  paren- 
tal love,  touches  upon  fraternal  love,  a  crucial  theme  of  the  play. 

The  love  of  one's  kindred  and  the  blessings  from  the  efficient,  patient  and 
upright  ruler  are  clearly  the  central  ideas  oiSophompaneas,  in  other  words,  piety 


ARTHUR   EYFFINGER  267 

as  the  governing  principle  in  micro-  and  macro-cosmos.  Hundreds  of  lines  are 
devoted  to  Joseph's  quenching  of  a  revolt  and  his  reorganization  of  Egyptian 
society  into  a  three-class  system,  which  may  perhaps  be  in  accord  with  Egypt- 
ian tradition  as  recorded  by  Herod,  and  certainly  are  in  conformity  with  Pla- 
to's ideas,  with  medieval  society  oi Ndhr-,  Wehr-  und  Lehr stand.  Yet,  more  than 
this,  they  are  in  accord  with  Grotius's  own  tenets  in  their  advocation  of  the 
middle  classes  as  the  backbone  of  society.  The  middle  classes  are  deemed  free 
from  the  insatiable  greed  of  the  nobles  and  the  base  fickleness  of  the  masses, 
both  of  which  are  exposed  in  full  detail  in  Grotius's  sketch  of  the  seizing  of 
a  town  by  the  mobs  and  the  ensuing  outrages. 

Now,  the  point  is,  had  Grotius  any  urgent  motives  to  emphasize  these  themes 
in  particular?  He  had  indeed.  The  themes  correspond  to  events  in  Grotius's 
life.  The  play  was  written  in  Germany  in  1634,  in  the  very  months  that  the 
Dutch  scholar  — after  first  three  years  in  prison,  then  ten  years  of  exile,  a 
subsequent  failure  of  an  attempted  return  to  Holland,  and  a  further  three  years 
of  exile  in  Hamburg— was  suddenly  offered  a  splendid  opportunity  for  revenge. 
Axel  Oxenstierna,  the  almighty  Swedish  Councillor,  inquired  after  his  will- 
ingness to  serve  the  Swedish  Crown  at  Paris,  the  centre  of  European  politics. 
Wide  horizons  opened  to  the  often  repudiated  genius,  who  had  previously  spent 
years  in  bitterness  and  lethargy  and  had  two  years  before  echoed  Scipio's 
famous  dictum:  "Nee,  patria,  mea  ossa  habebis!"  to  a  friend  in  Holland.  There 
are  clues  in  Sophompaneas,  as  there  are  in  Grotius's  correspondence,  and  side- 
remarks  by  friends,  that  Grotius  and  his  friends  were  struck  by  the  parallel 
between  his  own  fate  and  Joseph's  vicissitudes.^^  They  drew  from  it  definitely 
as  a  source  of  inspiration  and  guidance.  The  negotiations  with  Oxenstierna 
run  parallel  to  the  genesis  of  the  play.  Once  the  appointment  was  agreed  upon, 
the  tenor  of  Grotius's  letter  to  the  States  of  Holland  and  Prince  Frederick  Henry 
breathe  the  spirit  of  reconciliation  that  is  so  typical  of  Joseph's  nature.'^  All 
his  injured  pride  is  forgotten;  his  new  function  surpasses  any  position  he  could 
ever  have  wished  for  in  Holland;  he  is  recruited  to  unite  a  divided  Europe. 
His  intimate  friend  Vondel  hastened  to  render  the  play  into  Dutch  and  in  his 
Introductory  Note  remarked:  "...  at  moments  it  seemed  to  me  as  if  Joseph  had 
come  to  life  in  the  dramatist,  or  else  the  dramatist  had  walked  down  the  track 
of  the  Patriarch. "^^  Vondel's  translation  was  not  exactly  impeccable,  nor  does 
it  rank  among  his  best  literary  productions  —  far  from  it.  Still  it  was  primarily 
due  to  Vondel's  translation  that  Grotius's  play  remained  well-known  to  any 
Dutch  audience  up  to  the  beginning  of  this  century.  And  years  afterwards 
Vondel  would  have  his  literary  "revanche,"  as  he  wrote  two  other  plays  on  the 
Joseph  theme,  thus  inserting  Sophompaneas  as  part  of  a  classical  trilogy.  But 
the  play  found  acclaim  elsewhere  too.  In  his  Examen  de  Polyeucte  Corneille 
argues:  "L'illustre  Grotius  a  mis  sur  la  scene  la  Passion  meme  de  Jesus  Christ 
et  I'histoire  de  Joseph.  .  .  .  C'est  sur  ces  exemples  que  j'ai  hasarde  ce 
poeme."^^  The  French  poet  thus  bears  testimony  to  the  inspiration  a  human- 


268  *  GROTIUS'  DRAMA  ON  JOSEPH   IN   EGYPT 

ist  drew  from  a  classical  literary  genre,  a  biblical  theme,  and  personal  exper- 
ience. 

Peace  Palace,  The  Hague 


Notes 


1.  Sura  12.3. 

2.  See  H.  Priebatsch  Die  Josephgeschichte  in  der  Weltliteratur  (1937);  Lexicon  der  christ- 
lichen  Ikonographie  (1970),  2:423-34;  A.  Pigler  Barockthemen  (1974),  pp.  73-95;  H.  van 
de  Waal  Iconclass  (1982),  7:56-63. 

3.  Dichtung  und  Wahrheit,  vol.  1,  bk.  4;  Sdmtliche  Werke  Jubildums-Ausgabe,  22:165. 

4.  See  M.  Philonenkoyo^^/?^  et  Aseneth  (1968)  and  the  German  rendering  of  Firdou- 
si's  Yusuf  and  Zuleicha  by  O.  Schlechta-Wessehrd  (1889). 

5.  On  Origines  see  Migne,  PG  11  cc.  363-64  and  PG  12  cc.  245-46;  on  Tertullian 
see  Migne,  PL  2  c.  374;  on  Hieronymus  see  Migne,  PL  22  c.  908;  on  Isidore  see  Migne, 
PL  83  cc.  107,  273-74;  on  Venerable  Bede  see  Migne,  PL  91  cc.  265-66;  on  Alcuin 
see  Migne,  PL  100  c.  792. 

6.  In  Freud  und  die  Zukunft  (1936);  see  Gesammelte  Werke  (1960),  9:409  ff. 

7.  See  Cats,  Alle  de  Wercken  (1712)  1:167,  [176],  180. 

8.  See  Domien  ten  Berge,  De  hooggeleerde  en  zoetvloeiende  dichter  Jacob  Cats  (1979)  pp. 
57-68. 

9.  See  De  Wercken  van  Vondel  10  vols.  +  reg.  vol.  (1927-1940);  tract  in  vol.  2  (1929), 
p.  486  ff. 

10.  Cf.  Jean  Lebeau,  Salvator  Mundi;  I'exemple  de  Joseph  dans  le  theatre  Allemand  au  xvie 
siecle,  2  vols.  (1977). 

11.  Flav.  Jos.  Ant.  Jud.  2  §§  9-175. 

12.  Phil.  Jud.  Dejos.  §§  1-270. 

13.  See  M.  de  Jonge,  The  Testaments  of  the  Twelve  Patriarchs,  a  Study  of  their  Text,  Com- 
position and  Origin,  thesis  (Leyden  1953). 

14.  The  Letter  of  Dedication  to  G.  J.  Vossius,  in  Briefwisseling  Hugo  Grotius  (ed.  Meu- 
lenbroek  a.o.),  5:256-59  (no.  1936  dated  15.7.1634). 

15.  As  convincingly  argued  by  C.  van  VoUenhoven  in  Sophompaneas;  see  the  author's 
Verspreide  Geschriften  (1974),  1:231-86,  in  particular  pp.  235-43.  See  also  Briefwisseling 
vol.  X,  pp.  754-56  (no.  4395,  dated  19.11.1639). 

16.  See  Briefwisseling,  5:255-56  (nos.  1933  and  1935,  dated  13.7.1634). 

17.  J.  v.d.  Vondel  Huigh  de  Groots  losef  of  Sofompaneas.  Treurspel  (1635).  Ed.  Werken 
(1929),  3:431  ff.;  passus  in  lines  78-80  of  D^  Vertaeler  aen  alle  Nederlanders ,  ibid.  p.  435. 

18.  For  this  quotation  see  Lebeau,  o.c.  p.  634  (in  nt.  5  to  p.  122). 


Latin  Bucolic  Poetry 
in  16th  Century  Denmark 

Minna  Skafte  Jensen 

The  bucolic  genre  became  much  more  important  in  the  Renaissance 
than  it  had  ever  been  in  antiquity.  Most  of  the  great  Neo-Latin  poets 
wrote  eclogues.  In  Denmark  the  genre  thrived  for  roughly  a  cen- 
tury; at  the  beginning  and  the  end  of  its  life  stand  tv^o  collections  of  eclogues, 
one  by  Erasmus  Laetus  (1560)  and  the  other  by  Eric  Pontoppidan  (1643),  and 
between  these  two  is  found  a  series  of  single  pastorals  written  for  various  oc- 
casions by  various  poets.  Thus  even  if  bucolic  poetry  is  not  in  quantity  as  dom- 
inant a  genre  as,  for  instance,  the  elegiac  letter,  it  is  still  an  important  genre 
appealing  to  the  more  ambitious  poets,  and  it  spans  the  most  interesting  per- 
iod of  Neo-Latin  composition  in  Denmark.^ 

In  this  country  Neo-Latin  poetry  in  its  typical  forms  was  a  child  of  the  Pro- 
testant Reformation,  which  was  officially  declared  in  1537.  Two  aspects  of  the 
Reformation  were  especially  important  in  this  connection.  With  the  collapse 
of  the  Catholic  Church  great  economic  and  political  power  flowed  into  the  hands 
of  the  king,  who  thus  became  the  supreme  supporter  of  art  and  culture.  Be- 
sides, the  educational  institutions  were  systematised  in  a  way  hitherto  unknown, 
with  Latin  schools  in  all  the  important  towns  of  the  country,  and  with  the  uni- 
versity of  Copenhagen  reopened  and  carefully  modelled  on  Luther's  and  Me- 
lanchthon's  ideas.  The  establishment  of  these  new  institutions  for  religion  and 
education  made  the  need  acute  for  educated  persons  to  fill  the  posts  as  teach- 
ers and  parsons.  Therefore,  during  the  first  decades  after  the  Reformation  there 
was  a  new  social  mobility,  where  gifted  young  men  of  low  birth  had  the  chance 
to  make  a  career  and  rise  to  high  positions  in  the  restructured  society.  One 
of  the  qualifications  for  such  a  career  was  skill  in  composing  poetry  in  Latin, 
since  that  was  considered  the  final  proof  that  the  author  had  achieved  read 
fluency  in  the  language.^ 

But  essentially  Latin  poetry  was  an  important  medium  of  national  propa- 
ganda. The  Danish  kings  in  their  strengthened  position  tried  to  establish  them- 
selves as  Renaissance  monarchs,  surrounded  by  material  and  intellectual 


270  LATIN   BUCOLIC   POETRY  IN   DENMARK 

splendour,  and  Latin  poetry  was  a  part  of  this  courtly  refinement.  Much  of 
the  poetry  of  the  period  was  subsidised  by  the  king  in  some  way  or  other,  and 
a  common  message  was  that  of  demonstrating  that  Denmark  was  a  civilised 
nation,  a  suitable  abode  for  Apollo  and  the  Muses.  The  Neo-Latin  topos  of  in- 
viting the  Muses  is  recurrently  found  in  Danish  Latin  poetry  of  the  mid- 
sixteenth  century.  Poetry  in  Danish  might  be  put  to  a  similar  use;  thus  Anders 
Soerensen  Vedel's  collection  of  ballads  (1591)  had  as  one  of  its  explicit  pur- 
poses to  show  the  existence  of  national  traditions  comparable  to  that  of  heroic 
song  in  medieval  France.  But  Latin  literature  with  its  potential  of  reaching 
an  international  public  was  the  main  vehicle  for  the  national  message.  This 
is  especially  evident  for  the  genres  in  which  Sweden  and  Denmark  vied  with 
one  another  in  ideological  supremacy,  that  is,  history  and  epic,  but  it  is  also 
in  general  an  important  aspect  of  the  century's  Latin  poetry. 

In  this  pattern  of  Danish  kings  and  poets  posing  as  Roman  Maecenases  and 
Vergils,  bucolic  poetry  had  an  obvious  place.  Of  the  three  Vergilian  genres 
it  was  the  low  one,  treating  humble  subjects  and  belonging  to  the  great  mast- 
er's youth.  There  is  a  tendency  ior young  men  to  choose  this  genre  with  its  con- 
venient phrases  of  modesty,  elegantly  suggesting  that  great  results  may  spring 
from  a  modest  beginning  as  in  the  case  of  Vergil  himself.  Moreover,  both  Ver- 
gil and  Calpurnius  Siculus  offered  useful  models  of  courtly  praise.  By  comp- 
lying with  the  ancient  patterns  even  young  men  of  low  status  might  venture 
to  give  advice  to  the  king,  almost  achieving  a  man-to-man  level  of  commun- 
ication. 

These  possibilities  are  exploited  to  the  utmost  by  the  first  Danish  exponent 
of  the  genre,  Erasmus  Michaelius  Laetus  in  his  Bucolica,  a  collection  of  seven 
eclogues  published  in  1560.  They  are  ambitious  poems  where  the  Danish  court 
and  intelligentsia  are  masked  as  shepherds  engaged  in  learned  discussions  of 
philosophy  and  other  elevated  matters.  The  two  last  eclogues  are  directly  con- 
cerned with  important  events  in  the  royal  family:  the  death  of  Christian  III 
and  the  coronation  of  Frederik  II.  Laetus's  sixth  eclogue  is  modelled  on  Vergil 
number  five;  it  is  a  funeral  lament  with  the  dead  Christian  III  called  Daphnis 
like  Caesar  in  Vergil,  and  describing  his  pious  death  and  subsequent  ascent 
to  heaven.  The  seventh  eclogue  refers  to  Calpurnius  number  seven;  its  subject 
is  the  coronation  ceremony  of  Frederik  II,  and  it  expresses  the  hope  that  a  golden 
age  will  unfold  during  his  reign.  It  takes  place  on  a  hill  outside  Copenhagen, 
mons  Valbyacus,  to  which  the  Muses  are  invited  now  that  their  original  home 
has  been  occupied  by  the  Turks.  Both  these  poems  by  Laetus  are  ostentatiously 
long,  the  seventh  eclogue  alone  surpasses  in  quantity  Vergil's  collected  ten  ec- 
logues. At  the  surface  they  are  the  modest,  even  humble  address  by  the  young 
poet  to  his  sovereign,  but  there  is  no  reason  to  take  this  modesty  at  face  value. 

There  is  much  to  show  that  the  collection  is  really  a  highly  ambitious  work. 
It  is  introduced  by  a  letter  from  the  old  Melanchthon  to  the  young  king  Fred- 
erik II,  in  which  Melanchthon  recommends  the  poet  and  his  book.  He  em- 


MINNA  SKAFTE  JENSEN  27I 

phasizes  the  peaceful  Denmark  as  a  place  of  refuge  for  art  and  learning,  and 
he  points  out  what  he  finds  most  interesting  in  the  work:  the  praise  of  the  former 
king  as  a  champion  of  the  Christian  faith.  But  the  poems  themselves  also  show 
the  poet's  ambitions  by  various  formal  devises.  Each  eclogue  adheres  to  a  sty- 
lised common  pattern,  with  an  introductory  passage  in  narrative  form,  lead- 
ing gradually  to  a  dialogue  between  two  and  only  two  shepherds.  The  dialogue 
continues  to  the  end;  there  is  no  narrative  epilogue  to  correspond  with  the  in- 
troduction. The  two  shepherds  are  characterised  so  as  to  set  one  another  off: 
young  and  old,  happy  and  unhappy  etc.  Some  of  the  shepherds  are  recurring 
figures  from  one  poem  to  another.  Together,  the  seven  poems  create  an  im- 
pression of  a  small  world,  closed  into  itself. 

The  collection  shows  an  overall  composition,  where  poems  one  through  five 
are  equal  in  extent  to  the  concluding  two  royal  poems:  the  first  five  add  up 
to  1608  verses,  the  final  two  to  1607.  The  first  five  are  arranged  so  that  there 
is  a  close  connection  in  content  betweeen  one  and  four,  and  between  two  and 
five,  making  a  kind  of  frame  around  the  third  eclogue. 

This  poem  is  the  shortest  of  the  seven,  but  in  its  theme  perhaps  the  most 
important.  Two  shepherds  meet  and  decide  to  sing  of  mother  nature's  secrets 
(magna  parentis  /  Natures  secreta  v.  82-83).  They  sketch  the  analogies  in  nature, 
such  as  that  just  as  the  sun  is  brighter  than  other  celestial  bodies,  the  laurel 
surpasses  all  other  trees.  It  is  never  hit  by  Jove's  lightning,  and  it  is  not  subject 
to  decay.  It  is  consecrated  to  Apollo,  and  it  is  the  material  of  both  the  she- 
pherd's staff  and  the  poet's  wreath.  The  shepherd  also  speaks  of  the  friendships 
and  enmities  that  exist  between  certain  trees,  animals,  and  other  parts  of  na- 
ture. This  poem  is  introduced  with  a  dedication  to  Melanchthon,  the  only  per- 
son to  be  mentioned  in  the  poems  by  his  real  name,  not  masked  as  a  shepherd. 

The  overall  themes  of  the  book  are  the  duties  of  kings  and  poets,  and  these 
are  closely  connected.  The  very  name  of  the  dead  Daphnis  is  in  itself  a  signal 
of  this  relationship:  it  is  underlined  that  the  shepherd-king  is  named  after  the 
poet's  laurel.  Laetus  had  great  success  with  his  book,  both  at  court  and  among 
other  intellectuals.  It  is  referred  to  with  admiration  by  other  poets;  thus  there 
is  a  wedding-eclogue  by  lohannes  Pratensis,  written  few  years  afterwards,  in 
which  bucolic  poetry  is  called  Valbiacum  carmen  after  the  hill  to  which  Laetus 
had  invited  the  Muses:  "Dicite  Valbiacum  Musce  mihi  dicite  carmeri^  runs  the  re- 
frain of  this  poem.  And  still  a  hundred  years  later  the  learned  Ole  Worm  cidls 
Laetus  ""Danice  nostrce  Mard'  with  explicit  reference  to  hs  Bucolica? 

The  century  following  Laetus  saw  many  other  Latin  eclogues  by  young  Danes. 
As  a  whole,  they  employ  the  inherited  forms  and  treat  most  of  the  themes  com- 
mon to  Neo-Latin  pastoral. 

The  poems  are  dialogues  between  two  shepherds,  occasionally  with  a  third 
one  as  referee  or  arbiter.  The  shepherds  meet  as  one  of  them  is  on  his  way 
home  from  town,  or  they  sit  quietly  together  in  a  cave  or  under  a  shady  tree  — 
''sub  tegminejagr  is  a  frequent  quote.  Nothing  much  happens;  they  speak  with 


272  LATIN   BUCOLIC   POETRY  IN   DENMARK 

one  another,  discuss  poetry  or  philosophy,  or  they  compete  in  song.  The  land- 
scape by  which  they  are  surrounded  is  often  exotic,  with  mountains,  caves  and 
Mediterranean  vegetation,  and  it  may  be  the  home  of  such  pagan  divinities 
as  water  nymphs,  the  god  Faunus,  and  Apollo  with  his  Muses.  But  where  lo- 
calities are  given  a  name,  they  are  Danish.  Nothwithstanding  the  laurels,  vines 
and  tamarisks,  the  shepherds  meet  in  the  outskirts  of  Ribe,  or  Vejle,  or  Co- 
penhagen. 

The  themes  are  the  traditional  ones:  rural  life  in  its  various  forms,  cattle- 
breeding,  milking,  making  of  cheese,  hunting,  and  cultivation  of  the  fields. 
It  is  often  difficult  to  grasp  how  distant  or  close  the  poems  are  to  Danish  coun- 
tryside reality.  Sometimes  they  have  obviously  nothing  at  all  to  do  with  it,  as 
when  the  talk  is  of  pruning  the  vine,  but  more  often  than  not  there  seems  to 
be  a  fusion  of  Italian  and  Danish  life.  After  all,  cattle-raising  was  one  of  the 
most  important  trades  at  the  period  and  the  basis  for  the  economic  boom  that 
came  during  the  second  half  of  the  sixteenth  century. 

Music  and  poetry  are  important  themes.  The  shepherds  blow  their  pipes 
and  sing  alternate  songs,  and  they  speak  of  other  shepherd- singers  and  discuss 
their  qualitites.  But  the  real  subject  is  not  so  much  music  as  poetry,  Latin  poe- 
try at  that,  and  the  shepherd's  pipe  may  be  a  metaphor  for  learning  in  general. 
Thus  in  the  funeral  lament  that  the  young  Anders  Soerensen  Vedel  wrote  for 
his  former  teacher  at  the  cathedral  school  of  Ribe,  the  young  shepherd  Al- 
genus  expresses  his  gratitude  to  the  dead  Melisaeus,  who  once  taught  him  to 
play  the  flute.  The  instrument  is  a  symbol  of  the  blending  of  elementary  Latin 
and  ancient  culture  with  Christian  religion  and  morals  that  Vedel  was  given 
by  his  mentor.'^ 

The  polarity  of  life  and  death  is  a  central  theme,  not  least  in  the  funeral 
eclogues.  The  stress  is  on  the  soul's  immortality  and  the  importance  of  dying 
in  a  way  that  suits  a  pious  Christian  life. 

Philosophical  matters  are  discussed,  the  structure  of  the  world  and  the  se- 
crets of  nature.  The  shepherds'  life  is  intimately  connected  with  nature,  which 
reacts  sympathetically  to  the  events  of  their  community.  Animals  gather  to  take 
part  in  their  celebrations,  the  birds  sing  when  the  shepherds  are  happy,  but 
become  silent  when  a  shepherd  dies. 

Past  and  future  combine,  when  the  question  of  the  possibility  of  divine  fore- 
warnings  is  discussed.  Certain  events  in  nature  as  well  as  ancient  monuments 
may  carry  mesages  for  the  wise  shepherd  to  interpret  and  thus  predict  what 
the  future  has  in  store.  Hopes  of  a  golden  age  and  all-embracing  peace  are 
there  too.  A  somewhat  special  use  of  this  theme  is  in  an  eclogue  by  one  of  Tycho 
Brahe's  pupils.  Here  an  eclipse  of  the  sun  is  predicted;  the  shepherds  fear  the 
disasters  that  will  follow,  but  receive  the  help  of  two  divinities,  Arithmus  and 
Geometer.^ 

The  poems  differ  widely  in  mood.  Some  strike  a  playful  note,  others  are 
sad,  some  are  idyllic,  some  pretentious,  even  self-conceited,  some  are  mainly 
indulging  in  formal  experiments,  and  so  forth. 


MINNA   SKAFTE  JENSEN  273 

Often  the  eclogues  are  written  at  the  occasion  of  weddings  or  funerals,  and 
they  may  move  inside  the  private  circle  of  the  poet  or  celebrate  more  official 
events— just  as  the  coronation  of  Frederik  II,  that  of  his  son,  Christian  IV, 
found  description  in  a  pastoral.  A  Norwegian  poet,  Halvard  Gunnarsson,  wrote 
a  series  of  poems  celebrating  Christian  IV's  coronation  in  Christiania  (the  mod- 
ern Oslo).  One  of  these  is  a  pastoral,  and  the  pattern  is  again  that  of  Cal- 
purnius  seven:  two  shepherds  meet  on  the  heights  outside  Christiania,  and  one 
describes  to  the  other  the  magnificent  festivities  he  witnessed  in  the  town.^  A 
more  unusual  eclogue  was  written  at  the  occasion  of  the  peace  after  "The  Seven 
Years'  War"  between  Sweden  and  Denmark  (1563-1570).  The  poem  takes  place 
in  the  neighbourhood  of  Ribe  and  is  a  dialogue  between  a  student  returning 
from  Wittenberg  to  his  native  town  and  a  young  man  who  has  been  staying 
there  during  the  war.  In  this  poem  there  is  an  interesting  play  on  form:  we 
have  again  the  pattern  of  two  who  meet  one  another  outside  a  town,  but  the 
newcomer  is  returning  from  abroad  to  his  town,  not  coming  from  it,  and  the 
one  who  has  something  to  tell  is  not  the  newcomer  but  the  one  who  stayed 
at  home.^  Another  eclogue  slightly  outside  the  trodden  paths  is  about  the  in- 
stitution of  the  carnival,  sketching  its  history  from  the  ancient  world  to  con- 
temporary Denmark.^ 

There  are  bucolic  themes  that  might  have  occurred  but  do  not,  or  do  so  only 
to  a  very  limited  degree.  One  is  the  opposition  between  city  and  countryside. 
It  is  only  touched  upon  now  and  then  and  does  not  really  enter  until  the  ar- 
rival of  Danish-language  pastoral  in  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century. 
Probably  it  was  simply  not  felt  to  be  an  interesting  topic  in  sixteenth-century 
Denmark  at  all,  when  the  country  could  hardly  boast  any  city  of  importance, 
and  when  life  in  the  towns  did  not  differ  essentially  from  rursd  life. 

Another  theme  that  is  conspicuously  absent  is  that  of  love.  Most  of  the  ec- 
logues move  in  a  one-sex  world,  with  only  men  acting  and  speziking  only  of 
men.  Even  the  wedding-eclogues  are  able  to  do  without  anything  like  senti- 
mental love.  It  may  be  built  as  one  shepherd  describing  to  another  a  wedding- 
procession  he  has  attended  in  town,  or  it  may  be  a  discussion  between  two 
shepherds  for  and  against  marriage.  But  love  as  such,  the  theme  that  most  peo- 
ple immediately  associate  with  pastoral,  and  after  all  a  dominant  theme  of  the 
ancient  bucolic  genre,  is  not  there. ^ 

Third,  there  is  little  use  of  the  fusion  of  Christian  and  pagan  tradition  that 
was  important  for  some  versions  of  Mediaeval  and  Renaissance  pastoral. 
Among  the  various  genres  handed  over  from  antiquity  not  one  was  more  apt 
to  reconcile  the  latent  conflict  between  pagan  and  Christiain  culture  than  the 
pastoral.  Vergil's  fourth  eclogue  had  paved  the  way.  The  gospel  of  Christmas 
with  its  shepherds  to  whom  the  message  of  the  age  of  peace  was  brought,  was 
in  itself  a  classical  bucolic  scene,  making  the  genre  as  such  venerable;  and  the 
simile  of  Christ  as  the  Good  Shepherd  and  its  continuation  into  the  current 
terminology  of  pastor  and  flock  for  a  priest  and  his  congregation  offered  the 
Christian  poets  easy  terms  for  filling  Christian  content  into  a  pagan  frame.  *° 


274  LATIN   BUCOLIC   POETRY   IN   DENMARK 

In  Denmark,  this  potential  is  only  activated  towards  the  end  of  the  genre's  life, 
in  Eric  Pontoppidan's  three  books  of  Bucolica  Sacra  (1643).  They  retell  scenes 
from  the  Bible  in  the  form  of  Latin  hexameter  eclogues,  and  one  of  them  is 
the  Christmas  scene  of  the  shepherds  in  the  field. 

When  the  genre  first  made  its  arrival  in  Denmark,  the  fusion  of  Christian- 
pagan  traditions  seems  not  to  have  been  an  important  reason  for  its  appeal. 
At  the  time  the  dominant  attraction  was,  I  think,  that  no  other  genre  suited 
so  well  the  overall  view  of  the  world's  structure  in  time  as  well  as  in  space. 
The  theory  of  macrocosmos  and  microcosmos  had  become  widespread  during  the 
Middle  Ages  and  was  generally  accepted  in  the  sixteenth  century.  Everything 
had  its  proper  place  in  the  great  chain  of  being,  where  each  single  link  mir- 
rored the  whole,  and  where  order  was  maintained  through  a  subtle  balance 
of  friendship  and  enmity  among  the  phenomena.  Pastoral  fits  this  view  be- 
cause its  very  essence  is  that  of  describing  the  highest  strata  of  society  and  the 
most  elevated  topics  in  the  guise  of  humble  people  engaged  in  simple  duties. 
The  shepherds  live  close  to  nature,  which  brings  them  closer  to  the  eternal 
sphere,  since  nature  is  the  book  in  which  God  has  written  his  wisdom  readable 
for  those  who  are  able  to  decode  the  ciphers  of  divine  will.  Pastoral  is  itself 
a  cipher.  Nothing  is  what  it  purports  to  be.  The  landscape  seems  to  be  Me- 
diterranean but  turns  out  to  be  Danish.  The  shepherds  with  their  exotic  Lat- 
inised Greek  names  are  masks  behind  which  may  be  hidden  persons  of  real 
life.  The  shepherds'  pipes  are  no  musical  instruments  and  their  songs  no  real 
songs:  they  are  metaphors  of  the  art  of  composing  poetry  in  Latin.  The  genre 
as  such  lends  magnificence  to  the  poet's  task.  His  country  and  his  times  are 
dressed  in  a  Greco-Roman  cloak;  the  very  timelessness  of  the  form  gives  eter- 
nity both  to  the  mortal  actors  masked  as  shepherds  and  to  the  poet  who  "sung" 
their  praise. ^^ 

Koebenhavns  Universitet 


Notes 


1 .  Neo- Latin  pastoral  in  Denmark  has  not,  to  my  knowledge,  been  described  in  inter- 
national handbooks,  except  for  a  few  pages  in  W.  Leonard  Grant,  Neo-Latin  Literature 
and  the  Pastoral  (North  Carolina,  1965).  The  greater  histories  of  Danish  literature  treat 
some  of  the  poems  discussed  here;  most  important  are  N.  M.  Petersen,  Bidrag  til  den 
danske  Literaturs  Historie  III  {Copenhagen,  1855-1856);  Carl  S.  Petersen  &  Vilhelm  An- 
dersen, Illustreret  dansk  Litteraturhistorie  I  (Copenhagen,  1929)  and  Oluf  Friis,  Den  danske 
Litteraturs  Historie  I  {Copenhagen,  1945).  I  have  given  a  description  of  the  genre  in  Peter 
Brask  et  al.,  Dansk  litteraturhistorie  2  (Copenhagen,  1984),  pp.  413-28. 

2.  The  material  and  social  basis  of  Danish  Latin  poetry  is  discussed  by  Karsten  Friis- 


MINNA   SKAFTE  JENSEN  275 


Jensen  in  Peter  Brask  et  al.,  Dansk  litteraturhistorie  2  (Copenhagen,  1984),  pp.  375-85. 
For  the  Latin  schools,  cf.  Kristian  Jensen,  Latinskolens  dannelse  (Copenhagen,  1982). 

3.  lohannes  Pratensis:  Daphnis,  seu  votum  in  Nuptias  M.  lohannis  Thomae  &  vir- 
ginis  Magdalenae  (Copenhagen,  1563).  Ole  Worm,  Antiquitates  Danicce  (Copenhagen, 
1651),  p.  306. 

4.  Anders  Soerensen  Vedel:  Ecloga  Melisasus,  in  Johannes  Petri  Grundith:  Similitu- 
dines,  ed.  A.  S.  V.  (Wittenberg,  1567). 

5.  Petrus  Jacobus  Flemlossius:  /Egloga  de  eclipsi  solari anno  1574  (Copenhagen,  1574). 

6.  Halvardus  Gunarius,  Acrostichis.  (1606,  ed.  A.  E.  Eriksen,  Kristiania,  1870). 

7.  Johannes  Laurentius  Amerinus,  Egloga  de pacis foedere  inter  regna  DanicB  et  Suecia  nuper 
inito  (Wittenberg,  1573). 

8.  Janus  Dionysius  Jersinus,  Eidyllion  referens  peregrinationem  etfoeditatem  Bacchanalio- 
rum  (Copenhagen,  1607). 

9.  Descriptions  of  wedding  processions:  Jonas  Joannis  Koldingensis,  Ecloga  in  hon- 
orem  nuptiarum  Domini  Johannis  Schougaard  et  virginis  Anna  Parsberg  (Copenhagen,  1574), 
and  Petrus  Johannes  Ripensis,  Ecloga  in  honorem  nuptiarum  M.  Petri  Hegelundi  et  sponsoe 
eius  Margareta  (Rostock,  1580).  Discussion  between  Philogynes  and  Misogamus:  Boe- 
thius  Laurentius  Malmogiensis,  Ecloga  Gamice  in  honorem  D.  Nicolai  Alesii  sponsi  et  virginis 
Helence  (Copenhagen,  1598). 

10.  Cf.  Helen  Cooper,  Pastoral:  Mediaeval  into  Renaissance  (Ipswich,  1977). 

11.  The  structure  of  the  Renaissance  world:  A.  O.  Lovejoy,  The  Great  Chain  of  Being 
(Cambridge,  Mass:  1936);  E.  R.  Curtius,  Europdische  Literatur  und  lateinisches  Mittelalter , 
(1948;  2nded.,  Bern  1954),  pp.  306-52;  John  Hollander,  The  Untuning  of  the  Sky  (Prince- 
ton, 1961);  Leo  Spitzer;  Classical  and  Christian  Ideas  of  World  Harmony  (BaltimorG,  1963); 
Michel  Foucault,  Les  mots  et  les  chases  (Paris,  1966),  pp.  32-59  and  Hans  Blumenberg, 
Die  Lesbarkeit  der  Welt  (Frankfurt  am  Main,  1981). 


Styles  and  Mixed  Genres 
in  Erasmus'  Praise  of  Folly 

Clarence  H.  Miller 


Pope  Leo  X's  bon  mot  on  Erasmus'  Praise  of  Folly  touches  the  Knoten- 
punkt  from  which  most  discussions  of  the  work  radiate:  the  pope  said 
he  was  gratified  that  Erasmus  placed  himself  among  the  followers  of 
Folly.*  Just  how  and  to  what  degree  Erasmus'  own  opinions  and  beliefs  are 
implicated  —  seemingly  inextricably  implicated  —  in  Folly's  speech  zire  questions 
to  which  various  and  sometimes  incompatible  answers  have  been  given.  We 
have  been  told  that  for  once  he  gave  free  play  to  his  own  radical  skepticism 
and  took  refuge  in  a  sort  of  thoughtless  joiV  de  vivre,  relying  fin2illy  on  the  fe- 
licitous exploitation  of  illusions.  Many  (perhaps  most)  critics  believe  that  in 
the  second  part  of  Folly's  speech  — her  scathing  expose  of  the  ruling  classes, 
the  leaders  of  the  intellectual,  political,  and  ecclesiastical  establishment  —  there 
is  almost  no  difference  between  the  voice  of  Folly  and  that  of  Erasmus  himself. 
Many  critics  (I  think  too  many)  believe  that  in  the  third  part  of  her  speech  — 
her  praise  of  Christian  folly  —  she  presents  a  view  of  Christian  life  with  which 
Erasmus  entirely  agrees,  the  Enchiridion  merely  with  an  occasional  smile.  The 
mixture  of  the  serious  and  the  comic,  nugae  et  seria,  a  mixture  which  is  delib- 
erate (as  Erasmus  himself  pointed  out  in  his  dedicatory  letter  to  Thomas  More) 
is  dazzling  and  perplexing,  piquant  and  profound.  The  wide-ranging  sources, 
reaching  from  Homer  to  the  scholastics,  and  the  multifarious  literary  prec- 
edents (declamation,  paradoxicEil  encomium,  mock  sermon,  sottie,  sermon  joyeux) 
add  complicating  strands  to  the  shimmering  web.^  And  what  are  we  to  think 
when  we  learn  that  Erasmus  had  the  work  on  the  loom  more  than  once  —  that 
he  revised  it  seven  times  over  a  period  of  2 1  years  and  added  almost  20  %  more 
than  was  contained  in  the  first  edition?^ 

I  do  not  wish  to  multiply  difficulties  like  lawyers  who,  as  Folly  tells  us,  multi- 
ply and  complicate  their  materials  merely  to  make  them  seem  difficult  and  there- 
fore admirable.*  In  fact,  there  is  almost  nothing  you  can  do  with  the 
Mona  —  whether  editing  or  annotating  or  anfilyzing  —  without  having  Folly  point 
out  to  you  the  folly  of  what  you  are  doing.  She  has  some  wickedly  accurate 


278  *  STYLES  AND  GENRES  IN   ERASMUS 

things  to  say  about  grammarians,  rhetoricians,  and  the  pubUshers  of  books. 
And,  or  course,  the  Moria  gave  pleasure  and  profit  for  some  400  years  without 
benefit  of  criticism  or  analysis.  But  let  us  not  draw  any  sad  inferences  from 
that  fact:  that  way  lies  not  only  madness  but  unemployment  as  well. 

Instead,  let  us  glance  at  what  four  recent  critics  (none  of  whom,  I  think, 
would  be  so  foolish  as  to  deny  his  affinity  with  Folly)  have  said  about  the  struc- 
ture and  the  ironical  blending  of  voices  in  the  Moria.  And  then  I  will  examine 
briefly  the  style  of  the  Moria  (style  only  in  the  limited  sense  of  the  sentence 
structure)  in  an  attempt  to  give  some  answers  to  questions  about  structure  and 
blended  voices  in  the  work. 

Undoubtedly,  the  most  formidable  of  these  studies  is  M.  A.  Screech's  book 
Ecstasy  and  the  Praise  of  Folly  (London,  1981).  Limited  to  the  third  part  on  Chris- 
tian folly,  his  analysis  is  amazingly  learned,  always  informative,  often  illum- 
inating, and  extraordinarily  copious  (225  pages  explicating  some  seven  pages 
of  text).  He  argues  that  throughout  his  mature  lifetime,  especially  after  he  began 
studying  Origen  in  1503,  Erasmus  was  fascinated  by  the  mystical  theology  of 
religious  ecstacy  and  that  he  presented  his  doctrine  on  ecstacy  with  the  great- 
est intensity  and  seriousness  in  the  last  part  of  the  Moria.  All  the  patristic  and 
medieval  authorities  and  all  the  works  of  Erasmus,  especially  the  annotations 
on  the  New  Testament  and  the  late  psalm  commentaries,  are  searched  and 
sifted  to  show  that  the  last  part  of  the  Moria  presents  the  very  kernel  of  Er- 
asmus' own  theology.  In  fact,  Professor  Screech  treats  the  last  part  of  the  Moria 
almost  as  if  it  were  an  independent  essay  like  the  Enchiridion,  making  almost 
no  allowances  for  any  discrepancies  between  the  beliefs  of  Folly  and  those  of 
Erasmus.  Like  Folly  herself.  Professor  Screech  is  very  persuasive  because  he 
focuses  our  attention  so  unremittingly  on  only  one  part  of  the  evidence  from 
Erasmus'  religious  writings,  especially  what  Erasmus  says  about  scriptural  texts 
concerning  rapture  or  ecstacy,  like  the  amazement  of  the  three  apostles  at  the 
transfiguration,  or  St.  Paul's  rapture  into  the  third  heaven,  or  David's  feigned 
madness  before  Abimelech.  Folly's  notion  of  Christianity  may  bear  some  re- 
semblance to  such  an  immature  early  work  as  the  Enchiridion,  but  the  early 
work  seems  partial  and  extreme  when  compared  to  more  balanced  works  such 
as  the  Ratio  verae  theologiae  or  the  Convivium  religiosum.  Folly's  picture  of  Chris- 
tian ecstatics  such  as  Bernard  and  Bonaventure,  upon  whom  Professor  Screech 
relies  heavily,  allows  nothing  for  their  practical  and  efficient  engagement  in 
the  affairs  of  this  world.  Folly's  mystics  reject  this  world  so  totally  that  we  hear 
almost  nothing  about  what  they  do  to  help  their  fellow  Christians,  and  to  Er- 
asmus deeds  of  Christian  piety  were  extremely  important.  In  another  context 
Folly  (who,  unlike  Erasmus,  has  no  obligation  to  be  consistent  or  coherent) 
makes  Christ  himself  rebuke  foolish  monks  for  not  fulfilling  his  central  de- 
mand for  works  of  Christian  charity  (162/570-73). 

Hence  we  should  not  be  surprised  that  three  other  recent  critics  of  the  Moria 
have  qualified  or  even  rejected  Professor  Screech's  identification  of  Folly's  re- 


CLARENCE  H.    MILLER  279 

ligious  views  with  those  of  Erasmus.  In  an  article  on  paradox  and  parody  in 
the  Moria,  Jean-Claude  Margolin  expresses  his  deep  admiration  for  Professor 
Screech's  work,  but  he  complains  (very  gently)  that  Professor  Screech's  view 
of  the  last  part  of  the  Moria  is  somewhat  one-dimensional  and  ignores  the  sub- 
tle and  complex,  even  contradictory,  features  of  Erasmus'  religious  philoso- 
phy.^ And  he  points  out  that  Folly's  fmal  pirouette,  her  apology  for  not 
providing  an  epilogue  because  she  doesn't  remember  what  she  has  said,  leaves 
us  in  the  same  hall  of  mirrors  through  which  Folly  has  guided  us  from  the  very 
beginning.  Peter  Rudnitsky,  though  he  does  not  refer  specifically  to  Professor 
Screech's  book,  makes  a  similar  point  in  an  article  devoted  mainly  to  Rabelais 
but  which  opens  with  a  long  analysis  of  the  Moria. ^  He  insists  even  more 
strongly  than  Professor  Margolin  that  the  dilemma  of  incompatible  and  un- 
acceptable opposites,  the  double-bind  (as  he  calls  it)  of  Folly's  ambiguities,  ap- 
plies to  the  third  part  as  much  as  to  the  first,  though  he  is  interested  primarily 
in  the  secular  irony  of  the  first  part,  which  he  finds  nihilistic,  leaving  only  an 
emptiness  remaining  (in  the  words  of  Kierkegaard).  Professor  Screech's  anal- 
ysis of  the  third  part  also  helps  to  prevent  us  from  believing  that  the  irony  of 
the  third  part  is  also  nihilistic,  for  Folly's  view  of  Christianity,  however  partial 
and  impractical,  is  true  as  far  as  it  goes  and  was  intended  by  Erasmus  (I  think) 
to  make  the  Christian  reader  go  much  further. 

Finally,  in  his  magisterial  and  monumental  Grammaire  et  rhetorique  chez  Erasme 
(2  vols.,  Paris,  1981),  Jacques  Chomarat  not  only  gives  us  the  best  structural 
outline  (and  some  very  rare  and  choice  pages  on  style  as  well)  but  he  also  warns 
us,  most  emphatically  and  fully,  that  Folly  sometimes  speaks  with  the  voice 
of  Erasmus  and  sometimes  does  not,  and  that  she  may  switch  back  and  forth 
from  one  voice  to  another  even  within  a  single  sentence  {2,  972-1001).  And 
this  is  true  not  only  of  the  first  part  but  also  of  the  third.  Let  me  give  one  of 
his  examples  of  the  section  of  Christian  folly.  Folly  says  that  true  Christians 
"ignore  injuries,  allow  themselves  to  be  deceived,  make  no  distinction  between 
friend  and  foe."  Erasmus  would  agree  that  to  forgive  injuries  (not  necessarily 
to  ignore  them)  is  indeed  the  duty  of  a  Christian.  That  Christians  allow  them- 
selves to  be  deceived  is  equivocal:  Erasmus  would  agree  that  a  Christian  should 
forgive  the  deceiver  but  not  that  he  should  accept  the  deception.  And  to  make 
no  distinction  between  friend  and  foe  is  a  gross  distortion  of  Christian  charity 
which  Erasmus  could  hardly  accept  (983). 

Thus  Professor  Margolin's  wide-ranging  but  specific  examination.  Profes- 
sor Rudnitsky's  keen  and  acute  diagnosis.  Professor  Chomarat's  judicious  and 
balanced  treatment  —  all  provide  useful  correctives  for  the  copious  and  erudite 
exegesis  by  Professor  Screech. 

Professor  Chomarat  divides  the  Moria  into  five  parts  (973-81),  but  his  scheme 
is  not  incompatible  with  the  more  usual  tripartite  division.^  In  the  first  part 
Folly  argues  that  the  illusions  and  obsessions  of  folly  are  the  source  of  all  human 
enjoyments  and  achievements;  a  wise  perception  of  realities  leads  only  to  un- 


280  '  STYLES  AND  GENRES  IN   ERASMUS 

happiness,  misery,  and  even  suicide.  In  the  second  part,  Folly  claims  that  zJl 
the  ruling  classes  of  church  and  state  are  her  followers  and  are  all  the  happier 
for  it.  In  the  third  part,  she  tries  to  show  from  scriptural  authorities,  from  the 
lives  of  true  Christians,  and  from  the  final  happiness  they  pursue,  that  pure 
Christianity  is  also  folly,  not  only  in  the  eyes  of  worldly  fools  but  also  sub  specie 
eternitatis.  Elsewhere,  I  have  tried  to  explain  the  differing  ironies  of  the  three 
parts  and  to  relate  them  to  one  another;  and  I  have  especially  tried  to  stress 
that  the  third  part  is  as  ironical  as  the  first  — not  merely  the  Enchiridion  with 
a  smile. ^  To  establish  this  last  point  it  is  necessary  to  examine  Erasmus'  re- 
ligious views  in  his  other  works,  and  the  critics  I  have  mentioned  have  done 
so.  But  today  let  us  try  to  see  whether  it  is  also  confirmed  (I  think  that  it  is) 
not  only  by  the  skeletal  frame  but  also  by  the  syntactical  sinews,  the  sentence 
structure  of  the  work. 

Folly  has  three  basic  styles:  casual,  formal,  and  plain.  The  first  is  spontane- 
ous and  sophistical;  the  second  is  orotund  and  accusatory;  the  third  is  com- 
pact and  intense.  These  three  styles  do  correspond  to  the  three  parts,  though 
not  in  a  strict  or  rigid  way.  The  first  style,  the  casual-sophistical,  plays  an  im- 
portant role  in  all  three  parts:  it  is  dominant  in  the  first,  subsidiary  and  trans- 
itional in  the  other  two.  I  can  only  give  a  few  examples  to  characterize  the 
three  styles,  nor  can  I  pause  to  relate  them  to  the  triad  of  styles  made  famous 
by  Cicero  and  his  interpreters.  I  beg  you  to  believe  that  what  I  say  could  be 
confirmed  by  statistical  evidence.  Like  Folly,  I  am  fully  persuaded  that  my 
audience  is  so  wise  — so  foolish?  — no,  so  wise  as  to  find  everything  I  may  say 
plausible,  reasonable,  and  quite  incontrovertible. 

First  the  casual-sophistical  style,  the  one  highlighted  by  Folly  herself  when 
she  insists  that  she  has  not  labored  over  her  speech  but  simply  says  whatever 
happens  to  be  on  the  tip  of  her  tongue  (74/50-56).  Three  major  features  of 
this  style  are  rhetorical  questions,  parentheses,  and  afterthoughts.  I  hardly  need 
to  illustrate  rhetorical  questions:  the  pages  are  sprinkled  with  question  marks. 
But  I  should  point  out  the  sophistical  value  of  such  questions:  they  seem  to 
call  for  an  answer  without  giving  us  time  to  consider  more  than  one  alterna- 
tive. Consider,  for  example,  the  barrage  of  questions  Folly  employs  to  show 
that  she  makles  women  even  happier  than  men.  First  of  all,  she  says,  because 
of  their  beauty,  which  enables  them  to  play  the  tyrant  over  men.  And  what 
is  the  source  of  beauty  if  not  Folly  herself? 

Alioqui  vndenam  horror  ille  formae,  hispida  cutis  et  barbae  sylua,  plane 
senile  quiddam  in  viro,  nisi  a  prudentiae  vicio,  cum  foeminarum  semper 
laeues  malae,  vox  semper  exilis,  cutis  mollicula,  quasi  perpetuam  quan- 
dam  adolescentiam  imitentur?  Deinde  quid  aliud  optant  in  hac  vita  quam 
vt  viris  quammaxime  placeant?  Nonne  hue  spectant  tot  cultus,  tot  fuci, 
tot  balnea,  tot  compturae,  tot  vnguenta,  tot  odores,  tot  componendi,  pin- 
gendi  fmgendique  vultus,  oculos,  et  cutem  artes?  lam  num  alio  nomine 


CLARENCE   H.    MILLER  281 

viris  magis  commendatae  sunt  quam  stulticiae?  Quid  enim  est,  quod  illi 
mulieribus  non  permittunt?  At  quo  tandem  autoramento  nisi  voluptatis? 
Delectant  autem  foeminae  non  alia  re  quam  stulticia.  (90/346-56) 

Given  time  to  think,  we  might  reply  that  biology,  not  wisdom  or  folly,  causes 
the  hairiness  of  men  and  the  smooth  skin  of  women.  We  might  reply  that  not 
all  women,  and  certainly  not  all  women  at  all  times,  consider  that  their  main 
goal  in  life  is  to  please  men,  or  that  cosmetics  are  the  best  way  to  do  so,  or 
that  what  men  like  most  in  a  woman  is  empty-headedness.  As  usual  there  is, 
alas,  a  certain  plausibility  about  the  answers  Folly's  questions  demand,  but 
they  are  fortunately  not  the  only  possible  answers. 

Parentheses,  though  less  common  than  rhetorical  questions,  are  also  a  not- 
able feature  of  Folly's  casual  style.  Many  of  them,  such  as  sicuti  nostis  or  sicuti 
videtis,  claim  that  something  is  obvious  which  may  not  be  entirely  so.  Others, 
like  ut  opinor,  nifallor,  nisi  plane  mefallitphilautia,  are  modest  disclaimers  which 
actually  make  no  genuine  concessions,  although  they  may  remind  us  of  the 
ironical  convolutions  of  Folly's  praise  of  folly.  Some  parenthesis  slip  in  un- 
warranted conclusions:  as  a  monkey  in  purple  robes  is  a  monkey  still,  so  a 
woman  is  still  a  woman,  "hoc  est  stulta,"  however  she  may  try  to  mask  it.  Or 
a  comedian  may  be  hired  to  enliven  a  party  with  his  "ridendis  (hoc  est  stultis) 
dicteriis"  (90/340-42,  92/366). 

Other  parenthesis  show  Folly  thinking  on  her  feet,  momentarily  adopting 
and  usually  distorting  a  stance  which  is  foreign  to  her  (96/443-44)  or  making 
a  concession  which  she  immediately  proceeds  to  revoke.  Folly,  she  says,  is  the 
only  true  ground  of  friendship. 

De  mortalibus  loquor,  quorum  nemo  sine  vitiis  nascitur,  optimus  ille  est 
qui  minimis  vrgetur:  cum  interim  inter  sapientes  istos  deos  aut  omnino 
non  coalescit  amicitia  aut  tetrica  quaedam  et  insuauis  intercedit,  nee  ea 
nisi  cum  paucissimis  (nam  cum  nuUis  dicere  religio  est)  propterea  quod 
maxima  pars  hominum  desipit,  imo  nullus  est,  qui  non  multis  modis  de- 
liret,  et  non  nisi  inter  similes  cohaeret  necessitudo.  (92/391-96) 

She  seems  to  concede  parenthetically  that  perhaps  some  wise  men  can  culti- 
vate friendship,  but  she  ends  by  insisting  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  a  wise 
man.  The  carefully  calculated  digressions  from  which  she  occasionally  recalls 
herself  are  usually  parentheses  on  a  larger  scale:  in  them  too  she  seems  to  rec- 
ognize an  opposing  viewpoint  only  to  state  it  or  twist  it  so  as  to  turn  it  to  her 
own  account.  She  is  very  good  at  setting  up  and  blowing  down  straw  men. 
Less  obvious  but  more  persuasive  and  powerful  than  rhetorical  questions 
or  parentheses  are  syntactic  afterthoughts,  added  explanations  or  qualifications 
beginning  with  such  words  as  quanquam,  nisi,  tametsi,  quandoquidem,  ut  ne  interim 
dicam,  perinde  quasi,  nimirum,  nempe,  videlicet,  adeo  ut,  idque,  tantum  abest  ut.  Or 
the  additions  may  take  the  form  of  participles,  appositives  or  nominative  ab- 


282  •  STYLES  AND  GENRES  IN  ERASMUS 

solutes  tacked  at  the  end  of  a  sentence.  A  few  examples  will  have  to  suffice. 
To  the  objection  that  it  is  gauche  for  anyone  to  praise  himself,  Folly  replies 
that  it  is  eminently  fitting  for  her  to  do  so. 

Quid  enim  magis  quadrat  quam  vt  ipsa  Moria  suarum  laudum  sit  buc- 
cinatrix,  et  auxT)  TeauTTjv  auXfj?  Quis  enim  me  melius  exprimat  quam 
ipsa  me?  Nisi  si  cui  forte  notior  sim  quam  egomet  sum  mihi.  Quanquam 
ego  hoc  alioqui  non  paulo  etiam  modestius  arbitror  quam  id  quod  op- 
timatum  ac  sapientum  vulgus  factitat,  qui  peruerso  quodam  pudore  vel 
Rhetorem  quenpiam  palponem  vel  poetam  vaniloquum  subornare  solent 
eumque  mercede  conductum,  a  quo  suas  laudes  audiant,  hoc  est,  mera 
mendacia.  (72/32-38) 

Or  consider  how  Folly  trails  out  the  description  of  the  rich  fool  who  claimed 
the  abilities  of  his  own  servants  as  if  they  were  his  own: 

Qualis  erat  ille  bis  beatus  apud  Senecam  diues,  qui  narraturus  histor- 
iolam  quampiam  seruos  ad  manum  habebat,  qui  nomina  suggererent, 
non  dubitaturus  vel  in  pugilum  certamen  descendere,  homo  alioqui  adeo 
imbecillus,  vt  vix  viueret,  hac  re  fretus  quod  multos  haberet  domi  seruos 
egregie  robustos.  (128/43-47) 

Such  loose  sentences  contribute  to  Folly's  sophistry  in  many  ways:  they  enable 
her  to  make  spurious  concessions,  to  misdirect  our  attention,  to  treat  as  ob- 
vious what  is  far  from  certain.  But  above  all,  this  losseness,  uncorseted  but 
not  flabby,  does  much  to  create  that  sense  of  conversational  ease,  that  im- 
pression of  smiling  urbanity  and  sweet  reasonableness,  which  is  what  we  most 
remember  about  Folly.  They  are  the  syntactic  equivalent  of  her  basic  argu- 
ment that  one  should  relax,  accept  things  as  they  are,  enjoy  our  illusions,  never 
strive  against  the  inevitable  folly  of  all  men,  including  ourselves.  There  are 
other  important  features  of  Folly's  basic,  casual  style,  even  apart  from  her  dic- 
tion: dramatic  gestures,  oaths,  hesitations  and  corrections,  and  above  all,  lists 
or  congeries,  as  Professor  Chomarat  has  pointed  out  (997).  But  its  primary  in- 
gredient seems  to  me  to  be  a  loose  additive  sentence  structure. 

In  the  second  part  of  her  discourse,  the  survey  of  the  ruling  classes,  Folly 
maintains  this  casual-sophistical  style  in  her  vignettes  of  grammarians,  poets, 
rhetoricians,  writers  of  books,  lawyers,  dialecticians,  and  philosophers 
(138/242-144/380).  Only  when  she  reaches  the  two  central  groups  to  which 
she  devotes  most  of  her  attention,  theologians  and  monks,  does  her  style  be- 
come gradually,  though  not  entirely,  more  formal.  The  sentences  become  longer 
and  are  shaped  in  firmer,  more  balanced  and  repetitive  structures.  The  lists 
are  often  not  made  up  of  single  words  (as  they  tend  to  be  earlier),  but  of  longer, 
ideological  elements,  like  the  foolish  questions  of  the  theologians 
(146/395-148/407).  Finally  when  she  reaches  kings,  bishops,  cardinals,  and 
popes,  she  has  modulated  to  long,  parallel,  suspended  sentences,  quite  unlike 


CLARENCE   H.    MILLER  283 

her  casual  style  and  all  but  impossible  to  find  in  the  first  part  of  her  speech. 
Here,  for  example,  is  the  shortest  specimen,  concerning  bishops  who  fail  to 
recognize  the  high  duties  of  their  office  which  are  symbolized  by  their  vest- 
ments and  appurtenances. 

Ac  principum  quidem  institutum  summi  pontifices,  cardinales  et  episcopi 
iam  pridem  gnauiter  aemulantur  ac  prope  superant.  Porro  si  quis  per- 
pendat,  quid  linea  vestis  admoneat,  niueo  candore  insignis,  nempe  vitam 
vndiquaque  inculpatam;  quid  sibi  velit  mitra  bicornis,  vtrunque  fastig- 
ium  eodem  cohibente  nodo,  puta  noui  pariter  ac  veteris  instrumenti  ab- 
solutam  scientiam;  quid  manus  chirothecis  communitae,  puram  et  ab 
omni  rerum  humanarum  contagio  immunem  sacramentorum  admini- 
strationem;  quid  pedum,  nimirum  crediti  gregis  vigilantissimam  cruam; 
quid  praelata  crux,  videlicet  omnium  humanorum  affectuum  victoriam, 
haec,  inquam,  atque  id  genus  alia  multa  si  quis  perpendat,  nonne  tri- 
stem  ac  soUicitam  vitam  egerit?  (170/738-48) 

This  rigid,  accusatory  eloquence  seems  far  from  the  casual  ease  we  have  come 
to  expect  from  Folly.  But  let  us  remember  that  in  the  preceding  sections  Folly 
has  prepared  us  for  this  stark,  simplistic  irony.  She  went  from  the  laughable 
and  absurd  in  the  academic  types,  to  the  destructive  but  still  absurd  in  the 
theologians  and  monks,  to  the  corrupt  and  deplorable  in  the  kings,  bishops, 
cardinals,  and  popes,  to  a  final  picture  of  sacred  and  secular  society  totally 
vitiated  by  greed  as  each  class  passes  on  its  duties  to  another  from  top  to  bot- 
tom and  bottom  to  top  (176/841-55).  Only  then  does  she  pull  herself  up  and 
apologize  for  breaking  out  of  her  genre,  for  passing  from  the  encomium  into 
satire.  Folly  may  apologize  but  there  is  no  need  for  Erasmus  to  do  so.  He  was 
only  doing  what  most  great  artists  of  the  Renaissance  did:  carefully  mixing 
genres  in  order  to  gain  a  piquancy  and  intensity  which  one  genre  alone  could 
not  provide. 

In  the  third  part  Folly  immediately  drops  back  into  the  casual- sophistical 
style.  After  touching  briefly  on  pagan  authorities,  she  goes  on,  like  the  devil, 
to  quote  scripture  for  her  own  purposes;  and  she  does  so  in  sentences  like  those 
of  the  first  part,  with  plenty  of  rhetorical  questions,  parentheses,  and  trailing 
afterthoughts.  Much  of  her  sophistry  is  flagrant  and  obvious;  she  even 
boasts  —  modestly  of  course  — of  her  sophistical  prowess  (180/915-18).  Even 
when  she  chooses  Pauline  texts  on  Christian  folly  and  interprets  them  in  a  way 
that  is  consonant  with  what  Erasmus  says  in  his  annotations  on  the  New  Tes- 
tament or  elsewhere,  the  effect  is  quite  different.  We  may  be  slightly  startled 
and  put  a  little  on  our  guard,  but  before  long  she  will  reassure  us  with  her 
usual  patent  sophistry.  One  whole  paragraph  of  obvious  sophistry  added  toward 
the  end  of  the  third  part  serves  precisely  to  put  us  off  our  guard  (188/122-40). 
Erasmus  himself  noted  how  carefully  and  gently  he  had  prepared  for  Folly's 
final  fling. ^  And  when  she  does  spring  her  trap,  when  she  puts  on  the  lion's 


284  *  STYLES  AND  GENRES  IN   ERASMUS 

skin  and  sets  out  to  show  that  the  Christian  reHgion  is  akin  to  folly  and  that 
the  happiness  Christians  pursue  and  attain,  faintly  in  this  life  and  fully  in  the 
next,  is  a  sort  of  beatific  madness,  she  changes  her  style  yet  again.  Her  sen- 
tences become  brief,  taut,  self-enclosed,  firmly  framed.  They  are  connected 
not  by  loose,  additive  particles  but  by  firm,  relational,  (especially  contrastive) 
connectives:  primum,  postremo,  rursum,  etenim,  nam,  ediverso,  contra,  principio,  igitur, 
similiter.  The  explanation  is  spare;  the  reasoning  seems  tight.  Consider,  for  ex- 
ample, the  following  sentences  contrasting  pious  and  worldly  men: 

Itidem  vulgus  hominum  ea  quae  maxime  corporea  sunt  maxime  mir- 
atur  eaque  prope  sola  putat  esse.  Contra  pii,  quo  quicque  propius  ac- 
cedit  ad  corpus,  hoc  magis  negligunt  totique  ad  inuisibilium  rerum 
contemplationem  rapiuntur.  Nam  isti  primas  partes  tribuunt  diuiitiis, 
proximas  corporis  commodis,  postremas  animo  relinquunt,  quem  tamen 
plerique  nee  esse  credunt,  quia  non  cernatur  oculis.  Ediuerso  illi  pri- 
mum in  ipsum  deum,  rerum  omnium  simplicissimum,  toti  nituntur;  se- 
cundum hunc,  et  tamen  in  hoc,  quod  ad  ilium  quam  proxime  accedit, 
nempe  animum;  corporis  curam  negligunt,  pecunias  ceu  putamina  pror- 
sus  aspernantur  ac  fugitant.  Aut  siquid  huiusmodi  rerum  tractare  co- 
guntur,  grauatim  ac  fastidienter  id  faciunt,  habent  tanquam  non  habentes, 
possident  tanquam  non  possidentes.  (190/181-91). 

Here,  both  in  style  and  meaning,  we  seem  to  be  in  the  world  of  the  Enchiridion 
or  even  of  Thomas  a  Kempis  — until  finally,  once  again.  Folly  apologizes  for 
leaving  her  chosen  genre  and  bids  us  a  jolly  and  flippant  farewell  in  her  usual 
casual  style. 

Thus  Folly  has  twice  broken  out  of  the  paradoxical  encomium.  In  each  case 
she  does  not  do  so  throughout  the  whole  section  but  only  by  a  specially  pre- 
pared thrust  toward  the  end,  and  both  times  she  lets  us  know  that  she  knows 
that  she  has  done  it,  though  she  claims  she  did  it  through  mere  inadvertence  — 
she  forgot  herself.  But  Erasmus  did  not  forget  himself.  If  he  had  wanted  a  pure 
paradoxical  encomium,  he  had  plenty  of  chances  to  create  one  by  means  of 
revision.  And  it  is  always  best  to  assume,  as  George  Lyman  Kittredge  said 
long  ago,  that  a  great  writer,  at  least  in  his  masterpieces,  knows  what  he  is 
about.  If  Erasmus  wished  to  mix  his  genres,  to  combine  the  paradoxical  en- 
comium with  the  saeva  indignatio  of  the  satirist  and  the  inspirational  intensity 
of  the  devotional  manual,  he  has  his  reasons,  and  we  would  do  well  to  look 
for  them,  not  simply  accuse  him  of  not  doing  what  we  have  decided  he  in- 
tended to  do. 

One  of  the  reasons,  surely,  was  to  take  us  by  surprise.  The  unsettling  and 
dazzling  ambiguity,  the  ironical  crosslights,  the  dilemmas  of  Folly's  paradox- 
ical encomium,  expressed  in  what  I  have  called  the  casual-sophistical  style  — 
and  these  have  been  the  staple  of  modern  criticism  —  are  the  groundwork  of 
the  Moria.  Throughout  the  first  part  and  much  of  the  second,  we  are  inveigled 


CLARENCE  H.    MILLER  285 

into  accepting,  with  a  sigh  and  a  smile,  the  sad  but  fortunate  fact  that  the  il- 
lusions and  obsessions  of  Folly  are  beatific  and  necessary  for  any  human  ach- 
ievement or  happiness.  We  must  compromise.  Then,  almost  without  knowing 
how  we  got  there,  we  are  experiencing  a  stark  and  terrible  vision  of  a  society 
totally  compromised  by  self-interest  and  greed.  It  helps  us  to  see  that  this  mod- 
ulation into  a  different  genre  was  no  mistake  if  we  try  to  imagine  what  the 
section  on  rulers  2ind  churchmen  would  have  been  like  if  Erasmus  had  chosen 
to  remain  within  his  basic  genre.  How  much  less  intense  and  devastating  the 
satire  would  have  been  if  it  were  isolated  from  its  context  in  the  paradoxical 
encomium? 

Similarly  in  the  last  part  Folly  begins  in  the  usual  casual-sophistical  style 
of  the  first  part.  Much  of  her  scriptural  sophistry  here  is  obvious  enough,  out- 
rageous, blatant,  flagrantly  amusing  in  her  usual  paradoxical  manner.  We  are 
hardly  taken  in  by  the  argument  that  the  New  Testament  advocates  stupidity 
and  ignorance  through  the  frequent  mention  of  sheep.  Other  texts,  particu- 
larly the  Pauline  texts  on  Christian  folly,  must  be  taken  more  seriously,  but 
not  in  such  strict  and  exclusive  isolation  from  other  texts  which  counterbal- 
ance them.  Be  simple  as  doves,  certainly,  but  also  be  wise  as  serpents.  Con- 
centrating relentlessly  on  certain  texts  to  the  exclusion  of  others  which  seem 
to  temper  them  (or  even  contradict  them)  was  a  technique  that  often  led  to 
heresy,  as  Erasmus  knew  and  as  he  would  personally  discover  to  his  grief  when 
he  locked  horns  with  Luther  on  free  will.  Nevertheless,  we  are  presented  with 
a  dilemma  or  double-bind  here  as  we  were  in  the  first  part.  Totally  pure  and 
fully  committed  Christianity  seems  unworkable  in  a  frail  world,  as  the  Johan- 
nine  community  in  the  early  church,  for  example,  or  the  early  followers  of  St. 
Francis  of  Assisi  discovered.  Again  we  must  compromise.  But  again  we  are 
not  allowed  to  remain  wavering  in  a  hall  of  mirrors,  but  almost  before  we  know 
it  a  baroque  ceiling  opens  above  us  with  an  uncompromising  vision  of  total, 
ecstatic  commitment  to  the  full  and  final  felicity  of  the  beatific  vision.  No  more 
scriptural  sophistry,  but  a  dense  and  close-knit  argument  based  on  Plato  and 
the  tradition  of  mystical  theology  (as  Professor  Screech  has  so  admirably  shown). 
This  time  we  do  not  have  to  imagine  how  much  less  intense  and  affecting  this 
final  vision  would  be  if  it  did  not  emerge  from  the  context  of  paradoxical  en- 
comium, for  that  is  in  effect  how  Professor  Screech  has  treated  it  and  that  is 
why  his  book  may  be  somewhat  misleading.  For  he  takes  the  hnal  vision  as 
Erasmus'  own. 

But  is  Erasmus  giving  us  his  own  view,  his  own  voice  merely,  in  these  two 
departures  from  the  basic  genre:  the  satiric  vision  of  church  and  state  totally 
compromised  by  greed  and  self-interest,  and  the  ecstatic  vision  of  the  uncom- 
promising pursuit  of  union  with  God?  Yes  and  no. 

No,  because  if  he  had  consistently  and  continually  believed  that  all  kings, 
bishops,  cardinals,  popes,  and  clergymen  were  so  irretrievably  removed  from 
the  ideals  of  their  offices,  he  would  not  have  done  what  he  did  or  written  what 


286  *  STYLES  AND  GENRES  IN  ERASMUS 

he  wrote.  If  all  kings  are  total  and  incurable  tyrants,  why  write  about  the  ed- 
ucation of  a  Christian  prince?  If  all  popes  and  bishops  are  totally  corrupt,  why 
edit  Jerome  and  the  New  Testament  and  dedicate  them  to  a  pope  or  bishop? 
The  stark  polarities  of  the  satiric  vision  are  totally  paralyzing,  and  Erasmus 
was  anything  but  paralyzed,  however  pressed  he  may  have  been  from  all  sides. 

No,  cdso  concerning  the  fmal  vision  of  true  Christianity.  Not  only  were  those 
Erasmus  most  admired  among  his  contemporaries  not  mystical  or  ecstatic,  but 
he  was  also  opposed  by  temperament  and  conviction  to  enthusiasm  (in  Ro- 
nald Knox's  sense  of  the  word).  Even  more  fundamentally,  he  insisted  again 
and  again  that  Christ's  pure  and  lofty  doctrine  must  be  tempered,  adapted  (even 
compromised,  if  you  like)  to  the  abilities  of  frail  and  immature  Christians.  Christ 
himself  had  done  so  and  Erasmus  held  that  effective  Christian  pedagogy  re- 
quires a  sort  of  gradualism  (as  Professor  Chomarat  has  pointed  out  at 
length).  ^^  The  ecstatics  of  the  final  vision  make  no  such  compromises  —  in  fact, 
they  do  nothing  at  all,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  for  their  fellow  Christians.  They 
are  committed  only  to  Maria-Moria  (193/256-57).  True  Christian  mystics  have 
always  been  devoted  to  both  Martha  and  Mary,  and  Erasmian  Christianity 
falls  predominantly  in  the  domain  of  Martha. 

But  in  an  important  sense  Erasmus  also  believes  in  both  visions,  as  long 
as  both  are  experienced  within  the  context  of  Folly's  speech.  It  will  not  do  to 
interpret  anything  in  the  Moria  out  of  context,  as  Erasmus  tried  (unsuccess- 
fully) to  tell  his  critics.  In  their  context  both  visions  are  deliberately  extreme 
and,  by  implication  at  least,  they  are  also  paradoxical,  as  profoundly  though 
not  so  obviously  paradoxical  as  the  rest  of  Folly's  encomium.  Briefly,  church 
and  state  are  obviously  in  drastic  need  of  reform,  but  if  the  ruling  classes  are 
totally  corrupt  and  totally  complacent  in  their  corruption,  there  is  no  hope  of 
reforming  them.  Again,  Christians  are  called  to  be  perfect,  but  if  you  will  ac- 
cept nothing  short  of  perfection  the  whole  enterprise  must  be  abandoned  in 
despair.  I  do  not  need  to  point  out  to  you  — though  that  will  not  stop  me  from 
doing  so  — that  these  two  paradoxes,  in  a  somewhat  more  practical  form,  also 
lie  at  the  heart  of  More's  Utopia.  And  having  brought  the  Moria  back  to  its 
patron  More,  I  take  my  leave.  Quare  valete,  plaudite,  vivite,  bibite,  Moriae 
celeberrimi  mystae. 

Saint  Louis  University 


Notes 


1.  opus  epistolarum  Des.  Erasmi  Roterodami,  ed.  P.  S.  Allen  et  ai,  12  vols.  (Oxford, 
1906-1958),  3:184;  hereafter  cited  as  "Allen." 


CLARENCE  H.    MILLER  287 

2.  Moriae  encomium  in  Opera  omnia  Desiderii  Erasmi  Roterodomi,  Group  4,  Volume  3, 
ed.  Clarence  H.  Miller  (Amsterdam  and  Oxford,  1979),  pp.  13-24;  hereafter  cited  as 
""ASD  4/3" 

3.  ASD  4/3,  29-33. 

4.  ASD  4/3,  142/348-53. 

5.  "Parodie  et  paradoxe  dan  L'Eloge  de  la  Folic  d'Erasme,"  Novelles  de  la  Republique  des 
Lettres  (1983-11),  pp.  27-57. 

6.  "Ironic  Textuality  in  The  Praise  of  Folly  and  Gargantua  and  Pantagruel,"  Erasmus  of 
Rotterdam  Society,  Yearbook  Three  (1983),  pp.  56-103. 

7.  ASD  4/3,  18. 

8.  "Some  Medieval  Elements  and  Structural  Unity  in  Erasmus'  The  Praise  of  Folly,'' 
Renaissance  Quarterly  27  (1974),  499-511;  "The  Logic  and  Rhetoric  of  Proverbs  in  Er- 
asmus' Praise  of  Folly""  in  Essays  on  the  Works  of  Erasmus,  ed.  Richard  De  Molen  (New 
Haven  and  London,  1978),  pp.  83-98. 

9.  Allen,  2:104-5. 

10.  "Grammar  and  Rhetoric  in  The  Paraphrases  of  the  Gospels  by  Erasmus,"  Er- 
asmus of  Rotterdam  Society,  Yearbook  One  (1981),  pp.  59-60. 


Einige  Bemerkungen  zu  Frischlins  Dramatik 

Fidel  Rddle 

Das  literarische  Werk  des  Nikodemus  Frischlin^  ist  sicher  nicht  ganz 
so  spcinnend  wie  sein  Leben,  das  1547  begann  und  schon  1590 
abrupt  bei  einem  Fluchtversuch  aus  dem  Gefangnis  auf  Hohen- 
urach  endete,  ein  Leben,  das  wahrhaftig  Roman  und  Drama  in  einem  war 
und  noch  vor  kurzem  den  Stoff  fur  eine  Erzahlung  geliefert  hat.^  Trotzdem 
wird  man  nicht  viele  deutsche  Humanisten  benennen  konnen,  denen  im  16. 
Jahrhundert  auf  dem  Felde  der  lateinischen  Literatur  noch  ahnlich  vitale  poe- 
tische  Leistungen  gelungen  waren  wie  gerade  Frischlin. 

In  seinem  bekanntesten  Drama,  lulius  Redivivus,  lafit  er  einen  ganzen  Chor 
von  Autoren  seiner  Zeit  riihmen  durch  ein  fmgiertes  Gesprach  zwischen  Ci- 
cero und  Eobanus  Hessus,  den  Frischlin  selber  fiir  den  grofiten  neulateini- 
schen  Poeten  Deutschlands  hielt.  Viele  Namen  dieses  dramatischen 
Literaturkatalogs  sind  heute  praktisch  vergessen,  Eobanus  Hessus  und  auch 
Frischlin  werden  noch  gelesen  und  studiert. 

Ich  mochte  mich  in  diesem  Vortrag  auf  die  lateinischen  Dramen  Frischlins 
beschranken;  sie  nehmen  nach  allgemeier  Ansicht  in  seinem  Werk  die  erste 
Stelle  ein.  Adalbert  Elschenbroich,  der  eine  kritische  Frischlin-Edition  vor- 
bereitet,  hat  deshalb  auch  zunachst  die  Ausgabe  der  Dramen  ins  Auge  ge- 
fafit.*  Von  Frischlin  sind  uns  insgesamt  folgende  neun  lateinischen  Stiicke 
erhalten:  die  beiden  Bibeldramen  Rebecca  und  Susanna;  eine  Hildegardis  magna, 
d.i.  die  Geschichte  von  der  zu  Unrecht  verdachtigten  treuen  Ehefrau  Karls 
des  Grofien;  die  Helvetiogermani,  d.i.  eine  Dramatisierung  des  ersten  Buches 
von  Caesars  Bellum  Gallicum;  dann  der  bereits  erwahnte  lulius  Redivivus,  ein 
Werk  patriotischen  Stolzes,  in  dem  Caesar  und  Cicero,  beide  ausdriicklich 
miteinander  versohnt,  aus  der  Unterwelt  in  die  Germania  des  16.  Jahrhun- 
derts  versetzt  werden  und  die  kulturellen,  zivilisatorischen  und  technischen  Er- 
rungenschaften  des  deutschen  Volkes,  im  besonderen  die  Erfmdung  des 
Schiefipulvers  und  die  Kunst  des  Buchdrucks  sowie  die  Bliite  des  deutschen 
Humanismus  bewundern  miissen;  dann  der  Priscianus  vapulans,  eine  satirische 


290  BEMERKUNGEN   ZU   FRISCHLINS   DRAMATIK 

Attacke  gegen  die  akademischen  Sprachverhunzer  und  zugleich  ein  Lobpreis 
der  lateinischen  Sprache  und  ihrer  Retter  Melanchthon  und  Erasmus;  dann 
die  beiden  Tragodien  Venus  und  Dido,  die  als  Vergil -Centones  das  1.  bzw  4. 
Buch  der  Aeneis  dramatisch  wiedererzahlen;  schliefilich  Phasma,  ein  Spiel  iiber 
die  verschiedenen  Haresien  und  Haretiker  des  16.  Jahrhunderts.  {Phasma 
nimmt  wegen  seiner  scharfen  Konfessionspolemik  eine  Sonderstellung  ein. 
Frischlin  hat  dieses  Stiick  als  einziges  nicht  im  Druck  veroffentlicht,  es  er- 
schien  posthum  im  Jahre  1592.)  Alle  hier  genannten  Dramen  sind  auch  auf- 
gefiihrt  worden,  nicht  nur  auf  der  Universitat  und  am  Hof,  sondern  auch 
auf  Marktplatzen,  in  diesem  Fall  gewohnlich  mit  deutschen  Inhaltsangaben, 
die  dem  nicht  lateinkundigen  Publikum  das  Verstandnis  erleichtern  sollten.^ 

Antike  und  Bibel  bzw.  christliche  Religion  liefern,  wie  nicht  anders  zu  er- 
warten,  auch  dem  Dramatiker  Frischlin  im  wesentlichen  die  Stoffe,  und  die 
Antike,  reprasentiert  durch  Aristophanes  und  vor  allem  durch  die  lateinische 
Komodie,  dient  ihm  formal  als  Modell.  Frischlin  hat  die  beiden  Bereiche,  Bibel 
und  Antike,  dariiberhinaus  in  einer  besonders  merkwiirdigen  und  pointierten 
Weise  miteinander  verbunden,  indem  er  namlich  biblische  Dramen  kurzer- 
hand  mit  den  Titeln  von  Terenzkomodien  versah:  so  schreibt  er,  anstelle  des 
profanen  Terenz  habe  er  aus  der  biblischen  Geschichte  des  Agyptischen  Jo- 
seph drei  neue  christliche  Komodien  ("tres  comoedias  novas  et  sacras")  ent- 
worfen,  einen  Eunuchus,  eine  Komodie  Adelphoe  und  einen  Heautontimorumenos; 
auch  eine  Hecyra  habe  er  verfafit,  in  der  das  ganze  Buch  Ruth  dramatisiert  sei. 
So  liest  man  es  in  der  Widmung  des  lulius  Redivivus  vom  November  1584  und, 
etwas  variiert,  in  der  Praefatio  der  Gesamtausgabe  der  Dramen  von  1589.^ 
Bedauerlicherweise  ist  von  diesen  lateinischen  Komodien  nichts  erhalten 
geblieben  —  hingegen  besitzen  wir  aus  Frischlins  letztem  Lebensjahr,  der  Zeit 
seiner  Gefangenschaft,  eine  deutsche  Ruth  und  den  Entwurf  einer  deutschen 
Josephstrilogie. 

Man  wiifite  natiirlich  gerne,  in  welcher  Form  und  wie  weit  Frischlin  in 
seinen  lateinischen  biblischen  "Terenzkomodien"  auf  inhaltliche  Entsprechun- 
gen  zwischen  Terenz  und  den  Bibelgeschichten  geachtet  hat,  was  an 
Terenzischem  —  iiber  die  selbstverstandliche  Kongruenz  im  Formalen 
hinaus  — etwa  in  der  Geschichte  von  Joseph  untergebracht  werden  konnte.  Nach 
den  knappen  Inhaltsangaben  Frischlins  ist  damit  zu  rechnen,  dafi  das  jewei- 
lige  tertium  comparationis  sehr  aufierlich  blieb  und  die  Handlung  gar  nicht  ei- 
gentlich  betraf. 

Josephs  Schicksal  in  Agypten  hat  auf  den  ersten  Blick  nichts  mit  dem  Eu- 
nuchus des  Terenz  gemein,^  aber  es  trifft  sich  eben,  dafi  Putiphar  in  der  Ge- 
nesis mehrfach  als  "eunuchus  Pharaonis"  (37,36;  39,1)  bezeichnet  ist,  und 
sicherlich  bot  sich  aufierdem  eine  Parallelisierung  der  klassischen  Hetare  Thais 
mit  der  Frau  dieses  Putiphar  an.  Andererseits  ist  die  selbstqualerische  Sorge 
des  Menedemus  um  seinen  Sohn  im  Heautontimorumenos  in  einem  gewissen  Sinn 
auf  Jakob  und  seine  problematischen  Sohne  zu  applizieren;  hingegen  scheint 


FIDEL  RADLE 


291 


die  Verwendung  des  Terenz-Titels  Adelphoe  lediglich  darin  begriindet,  dafi  hier 
eben  Josephs  Briider  die  Hauptakteure  sind.  Auch  Hecyra  und  Ruth  sind  mit- 
einander  wohl  nur  vergleichbar  unter  dem  Gesichtspunkt  eines  atypisch  guten 
Verhaltnisses  zwischen  Schwiegermutter  und  Schwiegertochter. 

Seine  Adelphoe  hat  FrischUn  gliicklicherweise  noch  etwas  differenzierter  be- 
schrieben  durch  eine  Angabe,  die  uns  bestatigt,  was  ohnehin  analog  aus  seinen 
beiden  erhaltenen  lateinischen  Bibeldramen  zu  erschUefien  ware:  namUch  dafi 
er  sich  nicht  damit  begniigte,  die  bibUsche  Geschichte  getreu  nachzuerzah- 
len,  sondern  eigene  und  zwar  in  der  Regel  komische  Personen  und  Szenen 
neu  dazu  erfand,  auf  die  der  bibelkundige  Zuschauer  und  Leser  sehnsiichtig 
wartet.  Frischhn  schreibt:  "In  Adelphis  negociantur  fratres  in  Aegypto:  Si- 
meon luditur  a  Serapione,  servo  Josephi,  et  eiusdem  Graece  loquentis,  inter- 
prete.  .  .  ."^  ("Die  'Adelphoe'  schildern  die  Verhandlungen  der  Briider  in 
Agypten.  Dem  Simeon  wird  dabei  von  Serapion  ein  Streich  gespielt.  Dieser 
Serapion  ist  Josephs  Sklave  und  sein  Dolmetscher,  denn  Joseph  spricht  grie- 
chisch.")  In  der  Genesis  wird  lediglich  ein  Mai  (42,  23)  beilaufig  erwahnt,  dafi 
Jakobs  Sohne  in  Agypten  glaubten,  Joseph  verstehe  ihre  Sprache  nicht,  da 
er  (zu  ihrer  Tauschung)  iiber  einen  Dolmetscher  mit  ihnen  zu  reden  pflegte. 
Frischlin  hat  daraus  eine  Begegnung  zwischen  den  humanistischen  Schul- 
sprachen  Latein  und  Griechisch  inszeniert  und  dem  Dolmetscher  eine  zwei- 
fellos  mit  komischen  Elementen  ausstaffierte  Rolle  zugedacht.^^  Was  diesen 
griechisch-lateinisch  dolmetschenden  Sklaven  angeht,  so  ist  bemerkenswert, 
dafi  Frischlin  spater  in  seinem  bereits  erwahnten  Entwurf  der  deutschen  Jo- 
sephstrilogie  einen  lateinisch  sprechenden  Hofmeister  namens  Serapion  vor- 
gesehen  hat.  Am  Rand  der  deutschen  Inhaltsangabe  steht:  "Joseph  et  Serapio 
coUoquuntur  Latine  in  actione  Germanica."^^ 

Sprachmischung  in  alien  Formen  und  auf  alien  Ebenen  ist  ein  von  unserm 
Autor  virtuos  angewandtes  dramatisches  Stilmittel^^  — der  franzosisch  spre- 
chende  savoyische  Handler  AUobrox  und  der  italienisch  sprechende  Kamin- 
feger  im  lulius  Redivivus^^  oder  die  deutsch  sprechende  Jungfrau  Maria  im 
Phasma}^  sind  einpragsame  Beispiele  dafiir. 

Das  Problem  der  sprachlichen  Verstandigung  spielt  in  den  beiden  bedeu- 
tendsten  Stiicken  Frischlins,  im  lulius  Redivivus  und  im  Priscianus  vapulans,  ^^ 
eine  zentrale  Rolle,  denn  sowohl  die  in  das  16.  Jahrhundert  heraufbeschwo- 
renen  Klassiker  Caesar  und  Cicero  wie  auch  der  spatantike  Grammatiker  Pris- 
cian,  der  sich  in  diesem  16.  Jahrhundert  bzw.  im  spaten  Mittelalter  durch 
das  Latein  der  Vertreter  aller  Fakultaten  auf  das  schlimmste  mifihandelt 
fmdet  — sie  alle  stehen  fremd  und  ratios  vor  ihrer  eigenen  Sprache,  miissen 
sie  sich  erklaren  und  "iibersetzen"  lassen.  Das  betrifft  verstandlicherweise  zum 
einen  die  Neologismen,  die  durch  die  technischen  Erfmdungen  wie  etwa  die 
neuen  Feuerwaffen  bedingt  sind,  aber  es  betrifft  vor  sillem  ideologisch  neu  be- 
setzte  Begriffe.  Priscian  z.B.  bejaht  heftig  die  Frage  der  Theologen,  ob  ihm 
2in  der  "vita  aeterna"  gelegen  sei,  aber  er  begreift  nicht,  dd&  er  zu  diesem  Zweck 


292  BEMERKUNGEN  ZU   FRISCHLINS   DRAMATIK 

erst  dem  Satan  und  all  seinem  Geprange  abschworen  miisse.*^  Diese 
"Redivivus"-Konstellation  mit  ihrem  Siebenschlafereffekt,  mit  den  sachlichen 
Inkongruenzen  und  ihrem  unbegrenzten  Potential  an  Mifiverstandnis,  ladt 
nur  ZU  leicht  zur  komischen  Ausbeutung  ein,  aber  sie  hat  fiir  Frischlin  auch 
eine  ernste,  ja  weltanschauliche  Dimension,  wie  besonders  im  Priscianus  va- 
pulans  deutlich  wird. 

Ersatz  des  Heiden  Terenz  durch  "comoediae  sacrae"  — ein  solches  Programm 
ruft  einem  zumal  hier  in  Wolfenbiittel  natiirlich  Hrotsvit  von  Gandersheim 
in  den  Sinn,  die  im  10.  Jahrhundert  aus  Sorge  um  das  Seelenheil  der  christ- 
lichen  Leser  den  6  Dramen  von  Terenz  ihrerseits  6  erbauliche  Legenden- 
Dramen  entgegengestellt  hat,  allerdings  ohne  sich  weiter,  etwa  in  den  Titeln, 
an  Terenz  zu  orientieren.^  Die  Vorbehalte  gegen  Terenz  horen  sich  bei 
beiden  sehr  ahnlich  an.  Hrotsvit  spricht  von  den  "turpia  lascivarum  incesta 
feminarum,"*^  Frischlin  von  den  "artes  meretriciae,"^^  die  den  Knaben  durch 
den  profanen  Terenz  vermittelt  wiirden.  An  einer  anderen  Stelle  aus  dem- 
selben  Jahr  1584,  namlich  in  der  Vorrede  zur  Rebecca,  die  ein  Hoheslied  auf 
die  christliche  Ehe  ist,  distanziert  sich  Frischlin  noch  scharfer  von  Terenz:  zwar 
sei  dieser  mit  seiner  Eheauffassung  dem  indiskutablen  Plautus  vorzuziehen, 
doch  gottgefallig  konne  er  keinesfalls  sein: 

Quare  nuUam  meretur  excusationem  Terentius:  quod  honestiores  facit 
meretrices  et  scortatores,  quam  Plautus:  et  quod  colore  matrimonii  amores 
pingit  meretricios.  Longe  honestiores  sunt  nuptiae,  quas  Spiritus  sanc- 
tus  in  sua  Ecclesia  copulat.  .  .  .  Quod  cum  ita  sit,  neminem  ego  fore  ar- 
bitror,  qui  mihi  vertat  vitio:  quod  ego  in  meis  comaediis,  Hebraeorum 

exemplo  spoliavi  Terentium,  et  Plautum  sua  phrasi:  eamque  in  meli- 

20 
orem  et  sanctiorem  usum  converti.  ... 

Frischlin  bedient  sich  hier  der  tradierten  Vorstellung  (die  im  lateinischen  Be- 
reich  auf  Augustinus  zuriickgeht),  die  Christen  sollten  die  heidnische  Kultur 
niitzen  nach  dem  Beispiel  der  Hebraer,  die  den  Agyptern  vor  ihrer  Flucht 
noch  goldene  Gefafie  gestohlen  hatten  (Exod.  11,  2),  um  daraus  den  Schmuck 
zur  Ehre  des  wahren  Gottes  zu  gewinnen.^^  — Wohlgemerkt,  diese  Verurtei- 
lung  des  Terenz  steht  in  zwei  Widmungsvorreden  an  die  Ratsherren  der  Stadte 
Strafiburg  bzw.  Ulm,  —  in  der  spateren  Vorrede  zur  Gesamtausgabe  der  Dra- 
men von  1589  ist  Terenz  ohne  Einschrankung  anerkannt.  Frischlin  will  ihn 
nun  nicht  mehr  aus  den  Schulen  verbannen,  sondern  nur  seine  eigenen  Werke 
mit  Terenz  "verbinden":  "...  non  quidem  ut  ilium  e  scholis  exterminem,  sed 
ut  mea  cum  illo  coniungam."^^  Statt  ihn  — mit  Hrotsvit  — zu  ersetzen,  mochte 
er  ihm  lediglich  zur  Erweiterung  des  Lehrstoffes  in  den  Schulen  seine  eigenen 
christlichen  Dramen  an  die  Seite  stellen.  Tatsachlich  hat  er  selber  als  Schul- 
rektor  in  Laibach  seine  Susanna  zur  Lateinlektiire  der  Prima  neben  Terenz 
bestimmt.^^  Nur  wenige  Jahre  spater  ist  die  Idee  eines  christlichen  Terenz  er- 
neut  aufgegriffen  und  diesmal  im  alten  Sinne  eines  Ersatzes  fiir  den  jugend- 


FIDEL  RADLE  293 

gefahrdenden  Klassiker  verwirklicht  worden,  namlich  von  dem  Niederlan- 
der  Cornelius  Schonaeus  in  seinem  Terentius  Christianus  sive  comoediae  sacrae.  ^^ 

Bei  Frischlin  aber  fallt  sonst  kein  Schatten  mehr  auf  Terenz.  Die  Arznei, 
die  den  Priscianus  von  seiner  Verseuchung  durch  das  iible  Latein  rettet,  zube- 
reitet  u.a.  aus  den  rhetorischen  Werken  des  Camerarius  und  Sturmius,  ver- 
siifit  mit  den  Colloquia  familiaria  und  den  Adagia  des  Erasmus,  wird  gekocht 
im  reinen  Quellwasser  des  Terenz  (so  lautet  Melanchthons  Verschreibung): 
"concoquantur  in  aqua  fontana  Terentii."^^ 

Der  hier  zitierte  Priscianus  vapulans  ist  aus  der  sog.  aristophanischen  Gruppe 
der  Frischlindramen  zweifellos  das  Stiick,  dem  noch  die  meiste  philologische 
Arbeit  gewidmet  werden  miifite.  Hier  ware  eine  grofie  Anzahl  von  Quellen 
bzw.  Zitaten  zu  ermitteln,  ohne  deren  Kenntnis  vieles  unverstanden  und  zumal 
in  seiner  voUen  komischen  Qualitat  ungenossen  bleiben  mufi.  Der  lulius  Re- 
divivus  liegt  seit  1912  vor  in  einer  Ausgabe  von  Walther  Janell^^  mit  drei  ein- 
leitenden  allgemeinen  Darstellungen,  aus  denen  die  von  Gustav  Roethe  iiber 
Frischlin  als  Dramatiker  hervorragt.  Soeben  ist  die  deutsche  Ubersetzung,  die 
Frischlins  Bruder  Jakob  vom  lulius  Redivivus  hergestellt  hat,  von  Richard  E. 
Schade  herausgekommen.^'^  Fiir  die  Religionskomodie  Phasma  gibt  es  einen 
sehr  erhellenden  Aufsatz  von  Elschenbroich  aus  dem  Jahre  1974.^^ 

In  der  kurzen  Zeit,  die  mir  bleibt,  mufi  ich  mich  darauf  beschranken,  neben 
der  Terenzproblematik  noch  einige  weitere  Punkte  mehr  aufzuzahlen  als  ab- 
zuhandeln.  Dabei  geht  es  nicht  um  grofie  Entdeckungen,  sondern  um  Akzente. 

1.  Zunachst  eine  technische  Beobachtung.  Frischlin  verwendet  mit  einer 
deutlichen  Vorliebe  den  sog.  "gestuften  (u.U.)  belauschten  Auftrittsmono- 
log."^^  Gemeint  ist  hier  die  Gewohnheit  Frischlins,  eigentlich  dialogische 
Szenen  ungewohnlich  lange  (im  Vergleich  mit  den  antiken  Klassikern)  und 
fast  unnatiirlich  lange  mit  separaten  Monologen  der  spateren  Dialogpartner, 
die  auch  belauscht  sein  konnen,  einzufiihren.  Das  bedeutet,  dafi  der  Dialog, 
der  die  Handlung  ja  in  der  Regel  mehr  voranbringt  als  ein  Monolog,  der  also 
auch  mehr  vom  verfiigbaren  Handlungspotential  verbraucht  als  der  Mono- 
log,  hinausgezogert  wird.  Dadurch  erhalt  ein  gedankenreicher  Autor,  wie  es 
Frischlin  war,  Raum  fiir  sich  selbst,  und  er  spart  den  ihm  etwa  von  der  Bibel 
vorgegebenen  Aktionsvorrat  noch  etwas  auf. 

2.  Frischlins  enttauschende  Erfahrungen  mit  seiner  Umwelt,  die  sich  in  den 
Streitschriften  und  satirischen  Attacken  sehr  direkt  aufiern,  sind  in  den  Dra- 
men  abgelagert  in  Form  von  konstant  wiederkehrenden  Zeitklagen  mit  der  Je- 
wells dazu  gehorenden  laudatio  temporis  acti.  Die  bekiimmerte 
Gegeniiberstellung  von  Einst  und  Jetzt  fmdet  man  vor  allem  in  den  Bibel- 
dramen,  wobei  das  Jetzt  der  alttestamentlichen  Handlung  ersichtlich  auch 
Zustande  des  16.  Jahrhunderts  meint.  Ironischerweise  ist  die  gewohnte  Kon- 
frontation  zuungunsten  des  Jetzt  im  lulius  Redivivus  in  ihr  Gegenteil  verkehrt 
und  so  zum  dramatischen  Handlungsprinzip  und  eigentlichen  Inhalt  des  Stiicks 
erhoben.  Hier  wird  namlich  das  Jetzt  den  Vertretern  des  Einst  zur  Bewun- 


294  BEMERKUNGEN   ZU   FRISCHLINS   DRAMATIK 

derung  angeboten.  Der  Satiriker  Frischlin  verrat  diesmal  also  positiv,  woran 
er  glaubt  und  worauf  er  stolz  ist.  Freilich  enthalt  auch  dieses  Stiick,  vor  allem 
im  zweiten  Teil,  wiederum  Zeitkritik,  ^  auch  hier  wird  geklagt,  z.B.  dariiber, 
dafi  die  auslandischen  Handler  zu  einer  Landplage  geworden  sind,^^  oder 
dafi  man  im  verweichlichten  Deutschland  die  Helden  vom  alten  germanischen 
Schlag  nicht  mehr  fmdet.^^ 

3.  Zu  den  grofien,  unanfechtbaren"Lebensprinzipien"  Frischlins  neben  "La- 
tein,  Glaube  und  Germania"  gehort  nach  Roethe  die  Ehe.^^  Das  ist  sicher 
richtig:  die  Bibeldramen  Rebecca  und  Susanna  und  auch  die  Hildegardis  magncc''' 
(desgleichen  die  deutsche  Frau  Wendelgard)  sind  ein  einziger  und  iiberzeugender 
Lobpreis  der  Ehe  bzw.  der  treuen  Ehefrau.  Satan  wird  einmal^^  ausdriicklich 
und  gut  Lutherisch  als  Feind  der  Ehe  definiert.  Wenn  man  sich  allerdings  die 
Summe  der  einschlagigen  dramatischen  Aufierungen  ansieht,  so  fallt  auf,  dafi 
dieses  Lob  der  Ehe  und  der  treuen  Ehefrau  fast  immer  in  einem  kontrastie- 
renden  allgemein  und  traditionell  misogynen  Kontext  steht.  Uberspitzt  ge- 
sagt:  gliickliche  Ehen  und  treue  Frauen  diirfen  sich  nur  als  individuelle 
Ausnahmefalle  auf  Kosten  des  grundsatzlich  niedrig  eingestuften  Genos  her- 
ausheben. 

4.  Unter  den  grofien  "Lebensprinzipien"  Frischlins  war  von  Roethe  soeben 
auch  der  "Glaube"  genannt,  vielleicht  bewufit  und  mit  einem  gewissen  Recht 
ohne  ein  spezifizierendes  Adjektiv.  Natiirlich  ist  Frischlin  ein  entschiedener 
Anhanger  des  lutherischen  Glaubens,  aber  in  seinen  Dramen  spielt  mit  (der 
allerdings  gewichtigen)  Ausnahme  der  erst  posthum  veroffentlichten  Religi- 
onskomodie  Phasma^^  die  dogmatische  oder  konfessionelle  Defmition  dieses 
Glaubens  keine  Rolle,  ja  es  mufi  erstaunen,  dafi  sich  in  ihnen  so  gut  wie  kein 
polemischer  Ausfall  gegen  die  katholische  Kirche  fmdet.  Dabei  gabe  es  dazu 
eine  ganze  Menge  von  giinstigen  Gelegenheiten.  Caesar  mufi  z.B.  im  lulius 
Redivivus  umstandlich  iiber  den  neuen  "Pontifex  maximus"^^  aufgeklart 
werden,  die  beiden  letzten  Akte  der  Hildegardis  magna  spielen  im  mittelalter- 
lichen  Rom,  z.T.  sogar  in  der  Peterskirche,  und  der  Papst  Hadrian  wird  mehr- 
fach  erwahnt,  aber  nirgends  fallt  auch  nur  ein  ironisches  Wort  gegen  den  Papst 
und  seine  Kirche. ^^  Dabei  scheut  sich  Frischlin  sonst  nie,  "anachronistische" 
Anspielungen  in  seine  Stiicke  aufzunehmen:  gerade  in  der  Hildegardis  magna 
findet  sich  ein  fulminanter  Angriff  gegen  die  "heutigen"  Arzte,  die  zu  alien 
moglichen  homoopathischen  Hausmittelchen  ihre  Zuflucht  nehmen,  wenn  ihre 
Schulmedizin  versagt  hat.^^  Im  Priscianus  vapulans,  einer  Satire  gegen  alle 
schlecht  lateinsprechenden  Stande,  kommen  aufier  den  Philosophen,  Juristen 
und  Medizinern  natiirlich  auch  die  Theologen  an  die  Reihe  in  Gestalt  des 
Weltpriesters  Quodlibetarius  und  des  Monchs  Breviarius.  Man  kann  nicht 
sagen,  dafi  Frischlin  mit  diesen  Theologen  zart  umgeht,  aber  wieder  unter- 
lafit  er  in  seiner  Kritik  jeden  Angriff  auf  die  Institution  Katholische  Kirche. 
Was  er  blofistellt,  ist  die  geistige  und  sittliche  Verelendung  der  beiden  Kleri- 
ker,  aber  er  tut  das  in  einer  unangestrengten,  humorigen  und  behaglichen 


FIDEL  RADLE  295 

Weise,  die  er  aus  den  Dunkelmdnnerbriefen  gelernt  hat  und  die  an  die  Schwank- 
literatur  oder  besser  an  die  Facetienliteratur*^  erinnert. 

Zum  Schlufi  mochte  ich  noch  kurz  auf  eine  komische  Szene  des  Priscianus 
vapulans'^^  hinweisen,  die  man  spater  auf  dem  Jesuitentheater  vielfach  variiert 
wiederfindet.  Es  ist  der  Auftritt  des  Bauern  Corydon.  Dieser  hat  auf  schmerz- 
liche  Weise  erfahren,  wie  leicht  Juristen  und  Arzte  in  seinem  Fall  ihr  Geld 
verdient  haben  und  wie  reich  die  Geistlichen  sind,  ohne  dafi  sie  arbeiten.  Des- 
halb  wiinscht  er,  dafi  sein  Sohn  Alexis  auch  studiert,  denn  er  habe  einen  "un- 
glaublichen  Kopf  und  konne  auch  die  schone  Amaryllis  schon  gut  besingen. 
Doch  Erasmus  schickt  ihn  wegen  mangelnder  Eignung  und  wegen  der  voUig 
falschen  Vorstellungen  des  Bauern  von  einem  rechten  Studium  zuriick  auf  den 
Acker.  Viele  Bauernbuben  stehen  mit  ihren  Vatern  in  ahnlicher  Situation  auf 
der  Biihne  der  Jesuiten,  und  manchem  ergeht  es  genau  so  wie  Alexis. '^^  Wir 
sehen  hier  in  einer  ideologisch  neutralen  Sache  noch  etwas  von  der  Nachwir- 
kung  Frischlins  im  Jesuitendrama,  die  auch  sonst  erwiesen  ist'^^  und  die 
sicherlich  dadurch  ermoglicht  wurde,  dafi  Frischlin  wenigstens  in  seinen  Dra- 
men  auf  konfessionelle  Polemik  fast  ganz  verzichtet  hat. 


Anmerkungen 


1.  Von  den  zahlreichen  Arbeiten  iiber  Frischlin  konnen  hier  nur  wenige,  vorwie- 
gend  neue  Titel  genannt  werden,  von  denen  aus  der  Leser  bibliographisch  weiterfin- 
det:  David  Friderich  Straufi,  Leben  und Schriften  des  Dichters  und Philologen  Nicodemus  Frischlin, 
Frankfurt  a.M.  1856;  Nicodemus  YTischXmxis:  Julius  Redivivus,  hg.  v.  Walther  Janell, 
Berlin  1912  (Lateinische  Litteraturdenkmaler  des  XV.  und  XVI.  Jh.,  Bd.  19);  Josef 
A.  Kohl,  Nikodemus  Frischlin.  Die  Stdndesatire  in  seinem  Werk,  Diss.  Mainz  (masch.)  1967; 
Samuel  M.  Wheelis,  "Nicodemus  Frischlin's  'Julius  Redivivus'  and  its  Reflections  on 
the  Past,"  in:  Studies  in  the  Renaissance  20,  1973,  106-17;  Adalbert  Elschenbroich,  "Imi- 
tatio  und  Disputatio  in  Nikodemus  Frischlins  Religionskomodie  Thasma'.  Spathu- 
manistisches  Drama  und  akademische  Unterrichtsmethode  in  Tubingen  am  Ausgang 
des  16.Jh.,"  in:  Stadt  —  Schule  —  Universitdt  —  Buchwesen  und  die  deutsche  Literatur  im  17. Jh., 
hg.  von  Albrecht  Schone,  Miinchen  1976,  335-70;  ders.,  "Eine  textkritische  Niko- 
demus Frischlin- Ausgabe.  Voriiberlegungen,"  \n:  Jahrbuch  f.  Internationale  Germanistik 
12,  1980,  H.l,  179-95;  Jacques  Ride,  "Der  Nationadgedanke  im  Julius  Redivivus' von 
Nicodemus  Frischlin,"  in:  Daphnis  9,  1980,  719-41.  Richard  E.  Schade  (Ed.),  Nico- 
demus Frischlin,  Julius  Redivivus.  Comoedia,  in  der  Ubersetzung  von  Jacob  Frischlin,  Stuttgart 
1983  (Reclam  7981),  mit  wichtigen  Literaturhinweisen  und  Nachwort,  143-73;  Walther 
Ludwig,  "Frischlin,"  in:  Enzyklopddie  des  Mdrchens  (im  Druck).  Zitiert  wird  im  folgenden 
(wenn  nicht  anders  angegeben)  nach  der  Edition:  Operum  Poeticorum  Nicodemi  Frischlini, 
Poetae,  Oratoris  et  Philosophi,  pars  scenica:  in  qua  sunt  comoediae  sex  .  .  .  tragoediae  duae.  Ex 
recentissima  Auctoris  emendatione  Excudebat  Bernhardus  Jobin:  1592. 

2.  Hans  Joachim  Schadlich,  "Kurzer  Bericht  vom  Todfall  des  Nikodemus  Frischlin. 
Aus  den  Quellen,"  in:  ders.,  Versuchte  Ndhe,  Reinbek  bei  Hamburg  1978,  196-202. 


296  BEMERKUNGEN  ZU   FRISCHLINS   DRAMATIK 


3.  ed.  Janell  (s.  Anm.  1),  111,1,  S. 97-108. 

4.  Vgl.  Anm.  1  (1980),  182  ff. 

5.  Vgl.  den  Brief  des  Memminger  Rektors  Johannes  Lang  senior  vom  27.  Novem- 
ber 1578  an  Frischlin:  Operum  Poeticorum  Nicodemi  Frischlini .  .  .  pars  scenica  .  .  .  ApudBern- 
hardum  Jobinum  Anno  1585,  A  5r-A  6r. 

6.  Vgl.  Julius  Redivivus  (ed.  Janell,  s.  Anm.  1),  p.  LXXVII,  bzw.  Operum  Poeticorum 
.  .  .  pars  scenica  .  .  .  1592  (s.  Anm.  1),  Praefatio,  1  f. 

7.  Vgl.  Deutsche  Dichtungen  von  Nicodemus  Frischlin,  theils  zum  erstenmal  aus  den  Hand- 
schriften,  theils  nach  alten  Drucken  hg.  v.  David  Friderich  Strauss,  Stuttgart  1857  (Bibliotek 
des  Litterar.  Vereins  in  Stuttgart  XLI),  67-135. 

8.  Bemerkenswert  ist,  (was  in  der  Regel  iibersehen  wird),  dafi  Frischlin  in  dem  ge- 
nannten  Entwurf  der  deutschen  Josephstrilogie  fiir  das  erste  Drama  die  Captivi  (des 
Plautus)  assoziiert:  "Argumentum  Josephi,  sive  Captivorum"  steht  am  Rand  {Deutsche 
Dichtungen,  s.  Anm.  7,  S.67). 

9.  Ebenda  (s.  Anm.  6),  p.  LXXVII  bzw.  S.  1. 

10.  Uber  die  poetische  Legitimation  der  leichten  Personen  im  Bibeldrama  handelt 
Frischlin  im  Prolog  zur  Susanna  (S.  80  f.). 

11.  Deutsche  Dichtungen  (s.  Anm.  7),  74. 

12.  Zum  Problem  der  "Barbarolexis"  allgemein  und  bei  Frischlin  im  besonderen  vgl. 
Giinter  Hess,  Deutsch-lateinische  Narrenzunft,  Miinchen  1971  (MTU  41),  161-258;  vgl. 
auch  Kohl  (s.  Anm.  1),  136. 

13.  ed.  Janell  (s.  Anm.  1),  11,4,  S.  75-96  bzw.  111,3,  S.  1 19-28  und  V,2,  S.  148-50. 

14.  Operum  Poeticorum  N.  Frischlini .  .  .  pars  scenica,  Witebergae  1601 :  Phasma.  De  variis 
haeresibus  et  haeresiarchis ,  514-625,  hier  609  ("Scena  Germanica"). 

15.  Uber  die  Stellung  des  Priscianus  vapulans  in  der  Geschichte  humanistischer  Kri- 
tik  am  mitcelalteriichen  Latein  vgl.  F.  Radle,  "Kampf  der  Grammatik.  Zur  Bewer- 
tung  mittelalterlicher  Latinitat  im  16.  Jh. ,"  in:  Festschrift  far  Paul  Klopsch  zum  65.  Geburtstag 
(im  Druck). 

16.  IV, 2,  S.  373. 

17.  Hrotsvithae  opera,  ed.  Karl  Strecker,  Leipzig    1930. 

18.  Ebenda,  113. 

19.  ed.  Janell  (s.  Anm.  1),  p.  LXXVI. 

20.  Operum  Poeticorum  .  .  .  pars  scenica  1585  (s.  Anm.  5),  A  3 v. 

21.  Augustinus,  De  doctrina  Christiana  II,  40. 

22.  fol.  5v. 

23.  Vgl.  G.  Roethe  m  Julius  Redivivus,  ed.  Janell  (s.  Anm.  1),  p.  XXXIII. 

24.  Coloniae  1592. 

25.  S.  384. 

26.  Vgl.  oben  Anm.  1. 

27.  Vgl.  oben  Anm.  1. 

28.  Vgl.  oben  Anm.  1 ;  hier  ware  mit  Gewinn  die  Interpretation  von  G.  Hess  (s. Anm. 
12),  165-71,  heranzuziehen  gewesen. 

29.  Der  Terminus  stammt  aus  der  Arbeit  von  Bruno  Denzler,  Der  Monolog  bei  Terenz, 
Zurich  1968,  108. 

30.  Die  skeptische  Tendenz  des  Stiicks  betont  zu  Recht  Samuel  M.  Wheelis  (s. 
Anm.  1). 

31.  S.  84. 

32.  z.B.  S.  138. 

33.  Vgl.  "Frischlin  als  Dramatiker,"  in:  Julius  Redivivus,  ed.  Janell  (s.  Anm.  1),  p. 
XXIX. 


FIDEL  RADLE  297 

34.  Vgl.  dazu  Klaus  Schreiner,  "Hildegardis  regina.  Wirklichkeit  und  Legende  einer 
karolingischen  Herrscherin,"  in:  Archivf.  Kulturgeschichte  57,  1975,  1-70,  hier  43  f.;  die- 
sen  Hinweis  verdanke  ich  der  Freundlichkeit  von  Heinz  Hofmann. 

35.  Susanna  111,3,  S.  117  ("Satana  coniugii/Hostis  .  .  .");  vgl.  dazu  auch  Christiane 
Trometer,  "Die  polemischen  Ziige  in  den  Isaak-  und  Rebekka-Dramen  des  16.  Jh.," 
in:  Daphnis  9,  1980,  699-709. 

36.  Elschenbroich,  1976  (s.  Anm.  1)  erklart  die  fiir  Frischlins  Dramen  untypische 
konfessionelle  Polemik  von  Phasma  aesthetisch,  namlich  als  Konsequenz  aus  der  imi- 
tatio  des  Weltgerichtsspiels.  Hess  (s.  Anm.  12)  sieht  in  Phasma  eine  "satyra  illudens"  (S. 
165)  und  ein  "lateinisches  Fastnachtsspiel"  (S.  166). 

37.  ed.  Janell  (s.  Anm.  1),  11,3,  S.  72  f. 

38.  Nur  an  zwei  Stellen  {Hildegardis,  S.  206,  und  Phasma,  Operum  Poeticorum  .  .  .  pars 
scenica  1601,  S.  608)  wird  auf  Kosten  des  Papstes  gelacht:  hier  verwendet  Frischlin  je- 
weils  die  Interjektion  "papae"  in  Zusammenhangen,  die  dem  Zuschauer  bzw.  Leser 
den  Gedanken  an  den  Papst  suggerieren. 

39.  V,2,  S.  212  f. 

40.  Zu  Frischlins  eigenen  Facetien  vgl.  W.  Ludwig  (s.Anm.  1) 

41.  V,3,  S.  387-89. 

42.  Vgl.  etwa  S.  Udalricus  Episcopus  Augustanus  (Dillingen  1611,  Jean-Marie  Valen- 
tin, Le  Theatre  des  Jesuites  .  .  .  Repertoire  I.  Stuttgart  1983,  Nr.  652),  III,  7  oder  Georg 
Bernardt,  Theophilus  (1621,  ed.  F.  Radle,  Geisd.  Lit.  der  Barockzeit  5),  IV,1;  vgl.  femer 
Anton  Diirrwachter,  Ja^o^  Gretser  und  seine  Dramen,  Freiburg  1912,  S.  140. 

43.  Vgl.  dazu  Diirrwachter  ebenda  S.  136-46.  In  einem  Brief  des  Jesuiten  Georg 
Stengel  an  Matthaus  Rader  vom  19.  Februar  1610  wird  Frischlin  geriihmt  als  "doc- 
tissimus  poetaet  nostri  saeculi  Plautus"  (Arch.  Prov.  Germ.  Sup.  S.J.,  Miinchen,  Mscr. 
1,29,  Nr.  130). 


Baldassare  Castiglione  as  a  Latin  Poet 
Lawrence  V.  Ryan 

Baldassare  Castiglione  (1478-1529)  is  remembered  chiefly  for  his  Libro 
del  Cortegiano  (Venice,  1528),  a  courtesy  book  admired  by  genera- 
tions of  aristocrats  and  others  aspiring  to  gentility.  In  his  native  lan- 
guage, he  also  composed  some  fifteen  poems,  as  well  as  an  extensive  body  of 
correspondence  that  reveals  much  about  Italian  diplomacy  and  humanistic  cul- 
ture in  the  earlier  Cinquecento.  But  if  he  was  an  ardent  champion  of  the  ver- 
nacular and  even  defended  using  his  own  Lombard  dialect  as  a  vehicle  for 
literature  against  the  dominance  of  literziry  Tuscan,^  he  was  also  the  author 
of  a  small  group  of  Latin  carmina  which  were  frequently  printed,  copied  in  nu- 
merous manuscript  collections,  and  acclaimed  widely  for  more  than  two  cen- 
turies after  his  death. ^ 

These  Latin  poems  are  either  seventeen  or  nineteen  in  number,  depending 
on  whether  a  distich  on  Julius  Caesar  and  an  apparently  fragmentary  elegy 
"De  amore"  printed  among  them  are  from  his  hand.^  The  carmina  range  over 
a  variety  of  topics  of  personal  importance  to  this  Renaissance  man,  and  further 
round  out  the  image  of  him  as  embodying  in  himself  the  qualities  of  the  ideal 
courtier. 

The  tragedy  and  occasional  heroism,  for  example,  of  the  contemporary  wars 
of  Italy  are  depicted  in  his  "Prosopopoeja  Ludovici  Pici  Mirandulani,"  verses 
spoken  by  the  shade  of  the  recently  slain  lord  of  Mirandola  on  its  impending 
fall  (1511)  to  the  troops  of  Pope  Julius  II,  and  in  the  epigram  "De  viragine," 
on  the  death  of  a  valiant  maiden  in  defense  of  Pisa  against  an  invading  French 
army.  The  poet's  refmed  esthetic  taste  and  involvement  in  the  artistic  and  hu- 
manistic circles  of  Renaissance  Rome  are  reflected  in  his  "Cleopatra,"  on  the 
setting  up  in  the  Vatican  gardens  (1513)  of  a  recently  unearthed  statue  of  Ar- 
iadne (at  the  time  surmised  to  be  an  image  of  the  queen  of  Egypt);  "De  morte 
Raphaelis  pictoris,"  on  the  death  of  Raphael,  who  is  known  to  have  sought 
Castiglione's  advice  on  several  artistic  matters;*  "In  Cupidinem  Praxitelis,"  on 
the  celebrated  Hellenic  statue  from  Messina  mentioned  by  Cicero  and  Pliny; 


300  CASTIGLIONE  AS  A  LATIN   POET 

and  "Ex  Corycianis,"  a  contribution  to  an  anthology  extolling  the  patronage 
of  arts  and  letters  by  Cardinal  Johann  Goritz,  of  Luxembourg,  in  particular 
for  a  beautiful  sculptural  group  of  St.  Anne,  the  Virgin,  and  the  Christ  Child 
commissioned  from  Andrea  Sansovino  for  the  Church  of  Sant'Agostino  in 
Rome. 

The  most  highly  accomplished  of  Castiglione's  Latin  poems,  moreover,  deal 
with  intensely  personal  matters.  These  are,  first,  the  often  praised  eclogue 
"Alcon,"  written  in  1506  after  the  death  of  Domizio  Falcone,  tutor  to  Castig- 
lione's younger  brother,  and  then  four  of  his  longer  elegies.  The  most  uni- 
versally admired  of  these  latter  pieces  has  been  the  "Elegia  qua  fmgit  Hippolyten 
suam  ad  se  ipsum  scribentem,"  in  which  he  imagines  his  young  wife  Ippolita 
as  writing  a  verse  epistle  to  him  from  Mantua  during  1519  while  he  was  in 
Rome  on  a  mission  to  Pope  Leo  X.  The  apotheosis  of  his  adored  Duchess  of 
Urbino,  "De  Elisabella  Gonzaga  canente,"  and  his  fme  little  elegy  "Ad  puel- 
1am  in  litore  ambulantem,"  a  plea  to  some  youthful  inamorata  at  the  Urbines- 
que  court  to  beware  the  dangers  lurking  in  the  sea  and  to  come  instead  to  his 
embraces  in  a  safe  retreat  —  these  too  have  been  justly  acclaimed.  For  force- 
fulness  of  expression  and  for  originality  achieved  through  judicious  imitation 
of  earlier  models,  one  may  add  to  the  list  his  longest  and  most  complex  en- 
deavor in  verse  composition  (longest,  that  is,  except  for  his  vernacular  dra- 
matic eclogue  Tirsi);  namely,  the  sequel  to  "Ad  puellam  in  litore  ambulantem." 

Despite  their  unfamiliarity  to  most  modern  readers,  Castiglione's  carmina  have 
always  enjoyed  considerable  praise  from  critics.  During  the  Renaissance  and 
the  age  of  Neo-Classicism  his  Latin  verse  was  compared  favorably  to  that  of 
the  ancients.  His  contemporaries,  who  aspired  to  rival,  even  to  excel,  if  pos- 
sible, their  classical  predecessors,  wrote  of  him  as  Mantua's  "Secundum  .  .  . 
Virgilium"  and  played  upon  the  resemblance  between  his  surname  — "Castilio" 
or  "Castilionius"  in  Latin  — and  the  fount  of  poetic  inspiration,  the  Castalian 
spring.^  Julius  Caesar  Scaliger  preferred  him  as  an  elegist  to  Propertius  and, 
admiring  especially  the  "Cleopatra,"  declared  that  "si  omnia  sic  scripsit:  nulli 
post  Virgiliu  secundus,  illius  comes  haberi  mereatur.''^  His  eighteenth-century 
editor  Serassi  called  the  carmina  "elegantissime,  e  da  compararsi  alle  antiche,"'' 
while  the  literary  historian  Girolamo  Tiraboschi  asserted  that  the  "Poesie  lat- 
ine  singolarmente  son  tali,  che  poche,  a  mio  parere,  son  quelle  di  questo  per 
altro  SI  colto  secolo  che  lor  si  possano  paragonare,  perciocche  alia  sceltezza 
delle  espressioni  che  egli  ha  comune  con  molti,  unisce  un'energia  ed  una  forza 
che  in  pochi  altri  poeti  si  ammira."^ 

Modern  Italian  scholars  and  critics,  too,  such  as  Benedetto  Croce,  Bruno 
Maier,  editor  of  //  libro  del  Cortegiano,  and  Castiglione's  biographer,  Vittorio 
Cian,  have  held  him  in  high  regard  as  a  Latin  poet.  Maier  singles  out  espe- 
cially the  "Ippolita"  as  a  work  that  "va  collocata  senza  dubbio  fra  le  cose  mi- 
gliori  della  poesia  del  Cinquecento."^^  Cian  observes  of  "De  Elisabella 
Gonzaga  canente,"  the  "Hippolyta,"  and  "Ad  puellam  in  litore  ambulantem," 


LAWRENCE  V.    RYAN  3OI 

that  these  works  are  "tre  carmina  che,  se  non  saranno  il  trium  della  perfezione, 
possono  considerarsi  degni,  per  la  salvazione  sua,  cioe  pel  riconoscimento  della 
sua  seria  capacita  in  tale  campo  dell'attivita  poetica."^^  Careful  reading  shows 
that  the  respect  accorded  these  poems  has  been  justified.  For,  if  like  most  Neo- 
Latin  poets  Castiglione  draws  considerably  upon  the  classics,  in  his  carmina 
he  does  so  with  remarkable  originality.  The  poems  are  of  interest  too  because 
they  manifest,  in  a  relatively  small  compass,  how  fruitfully  the  practice  of  imtt- 
atio  could  work  not  only  from  classical  to  Renaissance  Latin,  but  also  from 
vernacular  to  Neo-Latin,  and  from  Neo-Latin  to  vernacular,  as  well  as  to  other 
modern  Latin,  literary  composition. 

In  order  to  illustrate  this  last  point,  one  may  consider  the  eclogue  "Alcon." 
While  "nearly  half  the  poem,"  as  Thomas  P.  Harrison,  Jr.,  has  noted,  "is  con- 
ventionalized from  Virgil  and  Moschus,  in  the  latter  part  the  poet  freely  voi- 
ces his  sorrow  without  violence  to  pastoral  conventions.  Alcon  is  neither  poetical 
exercise  nor  slavish  imitation:  preserving  the  best  in  the  tradition,  it  is  as  really 
a  product  of  scholarship  as  of  genuine  feeling. "^^  "Alcon,"  in  turn,  lies  in  the 
background  of  other  Renaissance  pastoral  elegies,  most  notably  John  Milton's 
Epitaphium  Damonis  and  probably  also  his  English  Lycidas}^ 

For  their  insight  into  feminine  psychology  and  empathy  with  women,  as  well 
as  for  the  ingenuity  in  creative  imitatio  that  he  displays  in  them,  one  may  cite 
several  of  Castiglione's  Latin  poems.  In  the  "Cleopatra,"  for  instance,  having 
been  moved  by  contemplating  her  supposed  statue,  he  lets  the  speaking  image 
reveal  the  Egyptian  queen  in  all  her  human  complexity.  Unlike  Plutarch,  who 
censures  her  as  the  ruin  of  Marc  Antony,  or  Ovid  and  Lucan,  to  whom  she 
is  merely  the  loathed  enemy  of  Rome,  Castiglione,  while  subtly  allowing  her 
flaws  to  show  through  in  her  attempt  at  self-justification,  at  the  same  time  fa- 
shions in  this,  prosopopoeia  a  sympathetic  portrait  of  Cleopatra.  She  is  less  than 
ingenuous  in  speaking  of  Antony  as  her  "dilecti  coniugis"  and  in  claiming  to 
have  lived  "sine  crimine,  si  non  /  crimen  amare  vocas."  Yet  Castiglione,  tak- 
ing a  hint  from  an  otherwise  hostile  Horace  {Carmina,  L37.  20-32),  portrays 
her  courage  in  dying  rather  than  permitting  herself  to  be  paraded  by  Augustus 
in  a  Roman  triumph,  and  he  has  the  statue  petition  Leo  X  to  honor  Cleopatra 
by  setting  up  her  image  in  the  papal  gardens. 

Similarly,  in  his  longer  elegies  he  ingeniously  imitates,  and  at  times  sur- 
passes in  sensitivity  to  the  emotional  concerns  of  women,  such  classical  fore- 
bears as  Propertius  and  Ovid.  He  echoes  both,  for  example,  in  his  "Hippolyta," 
which  was  sometimes  mistaken  in  the  past  for  a  precocious  literau-y  achieve- 
ment by  his  youthful  countess.'*  Especially  in  the  opening  and  closing  lines, 
he  draws  upon  the  epistle  of  the  Roman  matron  Arethusa  to  Lycotas,  her  sol- 
dier husband  campaigning  against  the  Parthians  (Propertius,  4.3).  The  initial 
verses  of  the  two  poems  are  almost  identical:  "Hippolyta  mittit  mandata  haec 
CASTILIONI"  and  "Haec  Arethusa  suo  mittit  mandata  Lycotae."  The  con- 
clusions of  the  two  elegies,  where  each  woman  promises  upon  her  man's  safe 


302  CASTIGLIONE  AS  A  LATIN   POET 

return  to  offer  votive  gifts  along  with  inscriptions  of  thanksgiving,  are  again 
strikingly  similar.  ^^  Further,  each  wife  fears  that  her  spouse  while  away  may 
be  tempted  to  infidelity,  Lycotas  with  some  barbarian  wench  and  Castiglione 
with  one  of  the  "cultas  puellas"  of  Rome.  Each,  too,  laments  that  she  possesses 
only  relics  of  her  husband  to  console  her,  Arethusa  some  of  Lycotas's  weapons 
left  behind,  Ippolita  a  painting  of  the  count  by  Raphael. 

Other  details  are  imitated  from  various  of  Ovid's  Heroides,  including  Lao- 
damia's  complaint  (3.  151-56)  that  she  only  has  left  to  caress  and  speak  to  a 
waxen  image  of  her  absent  Protesilaus,  as  Ippolita  must  be  content  with  such 
solace  as  she  may  find  in  her  husband's  lifelike  portrait.  But  the  imitation  here 
is  not  a  simple  aping  of  models.  Rather,  Castiglione  is  showing,  and  making 
his  readers  aware  of,  his  ability  to  rival  his  classical  sources  in  verbal  beauties 
and  even  to  excel  them  in  expressing,  not  the  artificial  sentiments  of  mythical 
or  pseudonymous  figures,  but  the  heartfelt  longings  which  he  and  his  wife  were 
enduring  while  he  was  on  his  embassy. ^^ 

In  Castiglione's  tribute  to  the  Duchess  of  Urbino,  "De  Elisabella  Gonzaga 
canente,"  and  in  the  paired  elegies  admonishing  the  puella  who  strolls  impru- 
dently along  the  Adriatic  seashore,  there  is  a  rich  weaving  in  of  classical  al- 
lusions and  borrowings.  He  opens  the  former  poem  with  a  line  from  the  Aeneid 
(4.  651):  "Dulces  exuviae,  dum  fata,  deusque  sinebant."  For  he  pictures  the 
duchess  as  singing  to  her  court  the  lament  of  Dido  at  her  sudden  abandon- 
ment by  Aeneas.  In  her  sweet  rendering  of  the  complaint  of  the  Carthaginian 
queen,  suggests  Castiglione,  this  modern,  more  divine  Elis(s)a  could  have 
moved  even  the  fleeing  Trojan  to  return,  for  she  brings  tears  to  the  eyes  of 
her  auditors  as  in  their  minds  they  reflect  upon  the  misfortunes  that  she  also 
has  suffered.  Touched  by  her  song  and  her  sad  lot,  Castiglione  prays  various 
feminine  divinities  to  bestow  upon  the  duchess  the  richest  gifts  in  their  control. 

His  "marine"  elegies  are  Castiglione's  most  surprising  poems,  because  they 
afford  a  glimpse  into  a  side  of  his  character  or,  better,  of  the  persona  that  he 
assumes  in  the  two  poems,  that  one  does  not  normally  associate  with  the  au- 
thor of//  libro  del  Cortegiano.  In  the  first,  "Ad  puellam  in  litore  ambulantem," 
he  warns  the  incautious  girl  that  she  may  be  ravished,  and  perhaps  devoured, 
by  foul  monsters  of  the  deep  unless  she  comes  away  with  him  to  recline  on 
the  shady  bank  of  a  nearby  rippling  stream.  There,  he  promises,  they  may 
bedeck  each  other  with  garlands  of  flowers  and  express  their  loves,  secure  from 
the  prying  eyes  of  jealous  courtiers  and  from  the  fearsome  creatures  that  lurk 
beneath  the  waves.  It  is  apparently  a  charming  idyll,  and  yet  one  vibrating 
with  undertones  of  brutal  sexuality  in  the  description  of  the  obscene  embraces 
that  await  any  unwary  maiden  who  is  borne  off  by  gods  or  sea-monsters,  un- 
natural horrors  that  may  reflect  an  underlying  violence  in  the  passion  of  the 
speaker  in  the  poem  as  he  tries  to  entice  the  girl  into  his  own  protective  arms. 
In  the  sequel,  the  seventh  of  his  carmina,  because  the  previous  warning  has  gone 
unheeded  and  the  lady  has  returned  to  wander  along  the  strand,  the  images 


LAWRENCE  V.    RYAN  3O3 

are  even  more  lurid  and  threatening.  They  are  drawn  partiy  from  the  poet's 
own  imagination  but  also  from  a  variety  of  other  sources,  ranging  from  Homer 
through  the  Romans  to  the  vernacular  Stanze  of  Agnolo  Poliziano,  as  the  speaker 
tries  to  frighten  his  inamorata  away  from  danger  by  recounting  what  had  hap- 
pened to  others  in  the  past  who  had  ventured  too  near  the  waves. 

Just  one  instance  of  imitatio  in  his  elegy,  however,  can  suffice  to  illustrate 
how  Castiglione  could  transmute  a  passage  from  a  source  into  something  that 
is  brilliantly  his  own.  Among  the  examples  that  he  gives  of  perils  from  the  deep 
is  Perseus's  last-minute  rescue  of  Andromeda.  The  story,  as  Ovid  tells  it  in 
Book  4  of  the  Metamorphoses,  is  focused  mainly  on  Perseus's  actions,  since  it 
is  but  one  of  the  adventures  in  the  poet's  narrative  about  the  demigod.  Cas- 
tiglione, however,  concerns  himself  with  refining  the  hero's  character  into  some- 
thing like  that  of  a  Renaissance  cavalier  and,  especially,  with  depicting  the 
emotions  of  Andromeda.  After  her  liberation,  Ovid  ignores  the  maiden.  She 
is  merely  the  "pretiumque  et  causa  laboris"  of  Perseus's  exploit  and  is  heard 
of  no  more  as  the  narrative  of  his  deeds  continues.  In  Castiglione's  elegy  the 
brief  scene  after  her  release  is  skillfully  dramatized,  and  Andromeda's  feelings 
become  the  focus  of  attention  as  her  joyful  savior  claims  her  hand,  embraces 
her  tenderly,  and  addresses  her  as  the  rich  reward  of  his  victory.  In  Ovid's 
version,  he  does  not  even  speak  to  her.  Instead,  he  had  already  bargained  for 
her  with  her  father  and  mother  even  as  the  monster  was  approaching  its  in- 
tended prey.  In  Castiglione's  treatment  of  the  scene,  the  rescued  Andromeda 
bitterly  reproves  her  "duri,  &  sine  Eimore  parentes"  for  having  exposed  her  to 
so  hideous  a  death,  protests  that  her  champion  will  henceforth  be  everything 
to  her,  even  if  she  were  to  become  his  slave  rather  than  his  bride,  and  departs 
without  regret  from  her  homeland  (11.  101-10).  What  could  have  been  a  mere 
copying  of  the  passage  in  the  Metamorphoses  thus  becomes  a  new  treatment  of 
the  episode  through  creative  imitatio,  serving  a  different  poetic  purpose,  and 
even  allowing  the  speaker  in  the  elegy  to  suggest  himself  as  a  Perseus-like  sa- 
vior to  his  own  puella. 

In  a  last  effort,  moreover,  to  lure  her  to  him,  he  seeks  to  heighten  the  girl's 
fears  by  ingeniously  dwelling  on  the  emotions  of  two  other  sea-threatened 
women  in  Ovidian  poetry.  As  his  pleadings  continue  to  fail,  he  echoes  the  elegy 
to  Corinna  embarking  upon  a  voyage  {Amores,  2.  11.  23-30)  and  draws  upon 
the  legend  of  Europa  in  the  Metamorphoses  (2.  873-74)  in  order  to  vent  his  ero- 
tic frustration  at  the  lady's  casual  disregard  of  his  warnings.  As  Ovid's  mistress 
would  look  despairingly  landward  when  the  seas  roughen,  so  Castiglione's /?u^//a, 
slung  across  the  back  of  some  grotesque  sea-creature,  will  cry  too  late  for  help 
while  the  mountains  and  the  shore  recede.  Although  the  more  important  source 
is  the  elegy  addressed  to  Corinna,  here  Castiglione  deliberately  follows  the 
phrasing  in  the  Metamorphoses.  His  "litusque  relictum  /  Respiciens"  (1 1 .  207-8) 
is  meant  to  recall  for  the  reader  Ovid's  "litusque  ablata  relictum  /  respicit"  (11. 
873-74).  The  image  of  Europa's  dismay  at  her  rape  serves  as  a  striking,  if  ap- 


304  CASTIGLIONE  AS  A   LATIN   POET 

parently  ineffectual,  attempt  to  frighten  the  girl  away  from  the  water's  edge 
into  the  speaker's  eagerly  awaiting  arms. 

One  could  cite,  in  this  elegy  as  in  a  number  of  the  other  Latin  poems  of 
Castiglione,  similar  examples  of  imitation  that  enable  him  to  call  his  mastery 
of  the  classics  to  his  assistance  in  responding  poetically  to  personal  situations 
and  to  important  human  interests  of  his  own  place  and  time.  Small  as  is  the 
body  of  his  carmina,  it  manifests  amply  that  he  is  a  poet  whose  work  is  worthy 
of  the  praise  which  has  often  been  accorded  it  and  which  deserves  preservation 
among  the  finer  products  of  Renaissance  Latin  composition  in  verse. 

Stanford  University 


Notes 


1.  In  the  prefatory  letter  to  his  Libro  del  Cortegiano,  Castiglione  vigorously  defended 
his  use  of  his  own,  instead  of  the  Florentine,  literary  dialect:  "Oltre  a  questo  usansi 
in  Toscana  molti  vocabuli  chiaramente  corrotti  dal  latino,  li  quali  nella  Lombardia  e 
nelle  altre  parti  d'ltalia  son  rimasti  integri  e  senza  mutazione  alcuna"  (//  Cortegiano  con 
una  scelta  delle  Opere  minori,  ed.  Bruno  Maier  [Torino,  1955],  p.  74). 

2.  Selections  from  the  carmina  and  individual  poems  survive  in  many  manuscripts 
in  Italian  libraries,  and  in  numerous  printed  anthologies  of  Renaissance  Latin  verse 
until  well  into  the  eighteenth  century.  All  of  the  Latin  poems,  apart  from  the  second 
epitaph  on  Ippolita,  were  edited  by  Gianantonio  and  Gaetano  Volpi  {Opere  volgari  e  lat- 
ine  del  Conte  Baldassar  Castiglione  [Padua,  1733]).  The  first  complete  printing  was  Abate 
Pierantonio  Serassi's  Poesie  volgari,  e  latine  del  Conte  Baldassar  Castiglione  (Rome,  1760); 
the  best  edition  of  both  the  Latin  and  the  vernacular  verse  is  in  Volume  Two  of  Ser- 
assi's Lettere  del  Conte  Baldassar  Castiglione,  etc.  (Padua,  1769-1771). 

3.  Though  included  among  the  poems  by  the  Volpi  and  by  Serassi,  these  editors 
doubted  the  authenticity  of  both  pieces.  "De  amore"  had  been  printed,  without  title  or 
attribution,  at  the  end  of  the  Venice,  1533,  edition  of  Jacopo  Sannazaro's  De  partu  Vir- 
ginis,  while  the  distich  on  Caesar  had  appeared  as  an  inscription  in  the  hall  of  the  ducal 
palace  during  celebration  of  carnival  at  Urbino  in  1513,  according  to  a  letter  in  which 
Castiglione  described  the  festivities  to  his  friend  Count  Ludovico  di  Canossa  (Baldassar 
Castiglione,  Le  Lettere,  ed.  Guido  La  Rocca  [Verona,  1978],  1:  344). 

4.  In  connection  with  his  painting  of  the  Galatea,  for  example,  Raphael  had  written 
to  Castiglione  soliciting  his  opinion  on  how  to  choose  a  model  for  the  sea-nymph  (Vin- 
cenzio  Golzio,  Raffaello  nei  documenti  nelle  testimonianze  dei  contemporanei  e  nella  letteratura 
del  suo  secolo  [Citta  del  Vaticano,  1936],  pp.  30-31).  The  two  friends  also  conferred 
about  the  design  for  the  villa  on  Monte  Mario  in  Rome  that  Raphael  was  planning 
to  construct  for  Cardinal  Giulio  de'  Medici  (ibid.,  p.  147). 

5.  For  instance,  "Secundum  /  Hie  docta  amisit  Mantua  Virgilium"  are  the  final  words 
of  Janus  Vitalis's  epigram  on  Castiglione's  death  {Lettere  del .  .  .  Castiglione,  ed.  Serassi, 
2.  xxxii).  The  pun  on  his  surname  occurs,  among  other  tributes,  in  Germanus  Au- 
debertus's  lines  on  Castiglione's  "Cleopatra":  "CASTILIO,  qui  Castsdio  de  fonte  pro- 


LAWRENCE  V.    RYAN  305 

pinquum  /  Cognomen  nactus  .  .  ."  (Castiglione,  Opere  volgari  e  latine ,  ed.  Volpi,  p.  359). 

6.  Poetices  libri  septem  (Paris,  1561),  p.  306. 

7.  Poesie  volgari,  e  latine  del  .  .  .  Castiglione,  p.  xxxi. 

8.  Storia  della  letteratura  italiana  (Milano,  1824),  7:  ii,  856. 

9.  Croce  ranks  Castiglione  among  those  Renaissance  authors  who  succeeded  in  creat- 
ing genuine  poetry,  rather  than  merely  exercising  their  humanistic  learning,  in  the  Latin 
tongue  {Poesia  popolare  e  poesia  d'arte,  4th  ed.  [Bari,  1957],  pp.  442  ff.). 

10.  //  Cortegiano,  p.  44. 

11.  Cian  especially  admires  these  particular  poems  because  they  effectively  express 
their  author's  personal  feelings  and  experiences,  and  he  agrees  with  the  literary  his- 
torian Francesco  Flamini  that  they  constitute  "le  tre  gemme  fra  i  carmina  castigliones- 
chi"  (op.  cit.,  p.  217). 

12.  The  Pastoral  Elegy:  An  Anthology,  ed.  Thomas  P.  Harrison,  Jr.  (Austin,  1935),  p.  11. 

13.  T.  P.  Harrison,  Jr.,  "The  Latin  Pastorals  of  Milton  and  Castiglione,"  PMLA, 
50  (1935):  480-93.  There  is  also  a  trace  of  influence  by  "Alcon"  on  Basilio  Zanchi's  elegy 
on  Castiglione's  own  death  (see  Lawrence  V.  Ryan,  "Milton's  Epitaphium  Damonis  and 
B.  Zanchi's  Elegy  on  BaJdassare  Castiglione,"  Humanistica  Lovaniensia,  30  [1981]:  108-23). 

14.  Although  first  misattributed  to  Ippolita  in  Horti  tres  amoris,  ed.  Aegidius  Peri- 
ander  (Frankfurt  am  Main,  1567),  fol.  277"^,  even  in  its  first  appearance  in  print  (in 
the  1533  edition  of  Sannazaro's  De  partu  Virginis)  the  poem  bore  the  title  "Balthassaris 
Castilionis  elegia  qua  fingit  Hippolyten  suam  ad  se  ipsum  scribentem." 

15.  Thus,  Propertius's  "armaque  cum  tulero  portae  votiva  Capenae,  /  subscribam 
SALVO  GRATA  PVELLA  VIRO"  is  deliberately  echoed  in  Castiglione's  "Vota  ego 
persolvam  templo,  inscribamque  tabellae:  /  HIPPOLYTE,  SALVI  CONIUGIS  OB 
REDITUM." 

16.  For  a  discussion  of  this  kind  of  imitation  called  aemulatio,  and  its  distinction  from 
both  mere  copying  and  dissimulatio ,  see  G.  W.  Pigman  III,  "Versions  of  Imitation  in 
the  Renaissance,"  Renaissance  Quarterly,  33  (1980):  1-32. 

17.  Compare  Metamorphoses,  4.  734-36: 

gaudent  generumque  salutant 
auxiliumque  domus  servatoremque  fatentur 
Cassiope  Cepheusque  pater;  resoluta  catenis 
incedit  virgo,  pretiumque  et  causa  laboris 
ipse  manus  hausta  victrices  abluit  unda,  etc., 

with  Castiglione,  Carmina,  7.  99-110: 

Cassiope,  Cepheusque  adimunt  vincla  aspera  natae. 

Ad  sua  tunc  laetus  praemia  victor  adest. 
Et  dextram  injiciens  dextrae,  colloque  sinistram, 

Nympha  meo,  dixit,  parta  labore,  mea  es. 
Ilia,  valete,  inquit,  duri,  &  sine  amore  parentes: 

Hie  pater,  hie  conjux,  hie  mihi  mater  erit. 
Vos  me  vestra  avido  exposuisti  viscera  monstro: 

Hie  me  Orci  e  mediis  faucibus  eripuit. 
Hunc  ego,  si  thalamo  me  non  dignabitur,  utro 

Serva  lubens  dominum,  qua  volet,  usque  sequar. 
Dixit,  &  ingressa  est  Persei  nova  nupta  penates, 

Nee  Patria  posthac  intulit  ilia  pedem. 


Euricius  Cordus 
Paul  Gerhard  Schmidt 

Unter  dem  unverfanglichen  Titel  Philologische  Untersuchungen  erschien 
vor  etwa  hundert  Jahren  im  Selbstverlag  des  Autors  eine  sechsban- 
dige  Lessingstudie.  Ihr  Verfasser,  der  "Koniglich  Preussische  Pro- 
fessor" Paul  Albrecht,  mufi  ein  guter  Kenner  Lessings  und  ein  nicht  minder 
guter  Kenner  der  von  Lessing  gelesenen  Biicher  gewesen  sein;  denn  er  no- 
tierte  sich  einzelne  Partien  aus  Lessings  Werken  und  druckte  parallel  zu  ihnen 
Texte  ab,  die  Ahnlichkeiten  mit  Lessings  Formulierungen  aufweisen.  Aus  der 
Konfrontation  ahnlich  klingender  Wendungen  und  Gedanken  schlofi  er  dann 
auf  "Leszings  Plagiate,"  wie  der  moralisch  eifernde  Untertitel  seines  Buches 
lautet.^  Dafi  einige  der  Sinngedichte  Lessings  sich  sehr  eng  an  Epigramme  des 
Euricius  Cordus  anlehnen,  ist  freilich  lange  vor  Albrechts  Philologischen  Unter- 
suchungen bemerkt  worden.  Schon  1793  wies  ein  Aufsatz  im  Neuen  teutschen  Mer- 
kur  auf  diesen  Umstand  hin.^  Seitdem  wird  in  der  Sekundarliteratur  der 
Einflufi  des  Euricius  Cordus  auf  Lessing  fast  regelmafiig  erwahnt.  Ein  Gym- 
nasialprofessor  des  vorigen  Jahrhunderts,  der  sich  in  mehreren  Aufsatzen  mit 
Leben  und  Schriften  des  Euricius  Cordus  beschaftigte,  verglich  die  lateini- 
schen  Vorlagen  mit  Lessings  deutschen  Fassungen  und  kam  dabei  zu  einem 
Schlufi,  der  angesichts  seiner  Interessen  nicht  iiberrascht.  Er  urteilte  iiber  die 
zwolf  entlehnten  Epigramme:  "Lessing  hat  zuweilen  nur  frei  iibersetzt,  meist 
aber  umgedichtet,  in  beiden  Fallen  ohne  das  Original  erreicht  zu  haben."^ 
Es  mag  dahingestellt  bleiben,  ob  Lessing  nun  das  Original  erreicht  hat  oder 
nicht.  Unbestritten  aber  ist,  dafi  der  hessische  Humanist  Euricius  Cordus  bis 
in  die  Gegenwart  als  der  bedeutendste  neulateinische  Epigrammatiker  seiner 
Zeit  in  Deutschland  gilt.  Wenn  auch  seine  iibrigen  Dichtungen  nur  spora- 
disch  Beachtung  fanden,  so  gehoren  seine  Epigramme  zum  Kanon  der  neu- 
lateinischen  Literatur;  eine  Auswahl  aus  ihnen  fehlt  in  kaum  einer 
neulateinischen  Anthologie.  Eine  kritische  Ausgabe  seiner  Epigramme  — 
geschweige  denn  der  iibrigen  Opera  poetica  —  gibt  es  freilich  nicht.  Die  langst 
iiberfallige  Ausgabe  wurde  schon  im  vorigen  J  ahrhundert  vorbereitet,  gelangte 


308  EURICIUS  CORDUS 

aber  nicht  iiber  eine  erste  Vorstufe  hinaus:  1892  erschienen  drei  von  insge- 
samt  dreizehn  Biichern  Epigramme  im  Druck.*  Die  Biicher  vier  bis  dreizehn 
sind  nach  wie  vor  nur  in  Ausgaben  des  16.  und  17.  Jahrhunderts  zuganglich, 
andere  Dichtungen  des  Euricius  Cordus  nur  in  den  seltenen  Erstdrucken.  So 
bedarf  die  Neuausgabe,  die  jetzt  in  Marburg  vorbereitet  wird,  keiner  langen 
Begriindung. 

Ich  will  hier  nicht  von  Editionsproblemen  sprechen,  sondern  Verbindungs- 
linien  zwischen  den  Epigrammen  und  seinen  weniger  beachteten  Dichtungen 
Ziehen.  Ich  beginne  mit  dem  Stadtlob  auf  Goslar.  Wie  aus  dem  Druck  von 
De  laudibus  et  origine  Goslariae  hervorgeht,  ist  es  im  Friihjahr  1522  wahrend  eines 
mehrw^ochigen  Aufenthaltes  des  Dichters  in  der  Stadt  entstanden.^  Durch 
diese  Datumsangabe  kann  eine  der  vielen  Liicken  in  der  Biographic  des  Cor- 
dus geschlossen  werden.  Bisher  war  man  auf  Vermutungen  dariiber  ange- 
wiesen,  wo  er  sich  nach  dem  Studium  in  Ferrara  und  vor  der  Tatigkeit  als 
Braunschweiger  Stadtarzt,  die  er  1523  antrat,  aufgehalten  hat.  In  zwei  neu- 
eren  Arbeiten  wird  die  Zeitspanne  zwischen  dem  fiir  1521  bezeugten  Studium 
in  Ferrara  und  der  Ubersiedlung  nach  Braunschweig  durch  die  Annahme 
iiberbriickt,  dafi  der  Italienaufenthalt  von  1521  bis  1523  gedauert  habe.^ 
Dabei  blieb  aufier  acht,  dafi  Cordus  weder  die  Neigung  noch  die  Mittel  hatte, 
sich  so  lange  von  seiner  Familie  und  Heimat  zu  trennen.  Der  Italienaufenthalt 
dauerte  nur  sechs  Monate  und  wurde  durch  die  Promotion  zum  Doctor  me- 
dicinae  in  Ferrara  abgeschlossen.  Die  Reise  unternahm  Cordus  in  Begleitung 
und  auf  Kosten  seines  Gonners  Georg  Sturz.  Bereits  im  Friihjahr  1522  fmden 
wir  ihn,  wie  aus  dem  Goslarer  Stadtlob  hervorgeht,  wieder  in  Deutschland  — 
wie  ich  meine,  auf  der  Suche  nach  einer  festen  Anstellung. 

In  seinem  Kurzepos  auf  Goslar  spielt  Cordus  mit  der  literarischen  Form  des 
Stadtlobs.^  Statt  dem  Leser  auf  einem  Rundgang  durch  die  Stadt  ihre  Se- 
henswiirdigkeiten  vor  Augen  zu  fiihren,  untemimmt  er  einen  Spaziergang, 
der  ihn  aus  der  Stadt  heraus  auf  den  Rammelsberg  fiihrt.  Von  dort  kehrt  er 
den  Blick  auf  die  Stadt  zuriick.  Die  gewaltigen  Mauern  der  Stadtbefestigung  — 
das  ist  sein  Eindruck  von  Goslar.  Ohne  einzelne  Bauwerke,  Kirchen  oder  Platze 
hervorzuheben,  bewundert  und  riihmt  er  2illein  die  wehrhaften  Mauern  der 
Stadt.  Goslar  hatte  sich  im  15.  Jahrhundert,  reich  durch  die  Einnahmen  aus 
dem  Silberabbau,  in  der  Tat  ungewohnlich  stark  befestigt.  Cordus'  Vergleich 
mit  den  Mauern  antiker  Stadte,  mit  Theben  und  Troja,  wirkt  deshalb  nicht 
deplaziert,  wie  sonst  derartige  Vergleiche  im  humanistischen  Stadtlob.  Ei- 
gentiimlicherweise  erfahren  wir  nichts  iiber  die  weiteren  Vorziige  Goslars  oder 
iiber  seine  Bewohner,  unter  denen  es  doch  "viri  illustres"  gegeben  haben  mufi, 
die  nach  den  Erfordernissen  der  Gattung  Stadtlob  zu  preisen  waren.  Mit  siche- 
rem  Gespiir  aber  fiir  das  Ungewohnliche  und  zugleich  Ortstypische  lafit  Cor- 
dus den  Leser  an  einer  Bergwerksbesichtigung  teilnehmen.  Zweifellos  stiitzt 
sich  Cordus  auf  eigene  Erfahrungen;  zu  genau  sind  die  Angaben  iiber  Klei- 
derwechsel,  Leitern,  Wasserkiinste,  Dreck,  Gestank  und  Dunkelheit  im  Berg- 


PAUL  GERHARD  SCHMIDT 


309 


innern.  Cordus  selbst  verweist  auf  zwei  literarische  Vorbilder,  von  denen  er 
jedoch  wenig  entlehnt  hat:  die  vergilische  Unterweltsschilderung  und  die  mit- 
telalterliche  Beschreibung  des  irischen  St.  Patricks  Purgatoriums.  Kritik  iibt 
er  an  einem  romischen  Autor,  mit  dem  sich  deutsche  Humanisten  bevorzugt 
auseinandersetzten.  Im  fiinften  Kapitel  der  Germania  hatte  Tacitus  die  Frage 
aufgeworfen,  ob  die  Gotter  aus  Zorn  oder  aus  Fiirsorge  dem  Land  Gold-und 
Silbervorkommen  vorenthielten.  Triumphierend  kann  Cordus  nun  auf  die  Gos- 
larer  Metallgewinnung  verweisen.  Sein  Stadtlob  geht  im  zweiten  Teil  auf  die 
Entdeckung  des  Silbervorkommens  bei  Goslar  iiber.  Er  schildert  die  Jagden 
Ottos  des  Grofien  in  der  Gegend  und  erzahlt,  wie  Ramnus,  ein  Jagdbegleiter 
des  Konigs,  im  steilen  Gelande  sein  Pferd  zuriicklafit.  Als  er  es  bei  seiner 
Riickkehr  losbindet,  stellt  Ramnus  fest,  dafi  das  Tier  unterdessen  mit  den 
Hufen  Erde  und  Steine  fortgeraumt  und  durch  sein  Scharren  einen  Erzgang 
freigelegt  hat.  Der  Herrscher  erkennt  die  Bedeutung  des  Fundes;  er  lafit  die 
Metalladern  ausbeuten  und  gibt  nach  seinem  Jager  Ramnus  dem  Berg  den 
Namen  Rammelsberg. 

Cordus  hat  seine  Dichtung  iiber  Stadt  und  Silberbergwerk  dem  Rat  der  Stadt 
Goslar  zukommen  lassen  —  sicher  in  der  festen  Erwartung,  fiir  seine  poetische 
Gabe  Dank  zu  fmden.  Wie  dieser  Dank  ausfiel,  konnen  wir  im  fiinften  Buch 
der  Epigramme  lesen.^  Die  Epigramme  des  Euricius  Cordus  mochte  ich  als 
sein  poetisches  Tagebuch  bezeichnen.  Sie  sind  nicht  nach  sachlichen  Prinzi- 
pien  geordnet,  ihre  Abfolge  scheint  vielmehr  chronologisch  zu  sein,  d.  h.  sie 
sind  in  der  Reihenfolge  publiziert,  in  der  sie  entstanden.  Lagen  jeweils  100 
Epigramme  vor,  fafite  Cordus  sie  zu  einem  Buch  zusammen.  Im  Druck  er- 
schienen  1517  die  beiden  ersten  Biicher,  1520  Buch  1-3,  1529  Buch  1-9,  post- 
um  (ca.  1554)  dann  Buch  1-13.  Die  ersten  und  die  letzten  Epigramme  der 
einzelnen  Biicher  sind  wohl  in  Abweichung  von  der  chronologischen  Reihen- 
folge entstanden;  mit  den  Epigrammen,  die  er  an  diese  exponierten  Steilen 
setzte,  dankte  Cordus  seinen  Gonnern.  Zehn  Biicher  (4-13)  werden  mit  Epi- 
grammen auf  Georg  Sturz  eingeleitet;  das  jeweils  100.  Epigramm  in  den  ein- 
zelnen Biichern  gilt  anderen  Gonnern  und  Freunden.  Einzig  das  vierte  Buch, 
das  die  Italienepigramme  enthalt,  wird  durch  ein  Gedicht  auf  Sturz  sowohl 
eroffnet  ails  auch  abgeschlossen.  Diese  Sonderstellung  ist  einleuchtend,  hat  Sturz 
doch  die  Kosten  der  Reise  fiir  Cordus  getragen.  Das  erste  Epigramm  des 
fiinften  Buches  erwahnt  zwar  noch  den  in  Ferrara  erworbenen  Doktorhut, 
seine  folgenden  Epigramme  wenden  sich  aber  deutschen  Verhaltnissen  zu.  Mit 
Epigramm  18  des  fiinften  Buches  beginnt  eine  Serie  von  Gedichten,  die  sich 
auf  das  Goslarer  Stadtlob  beziehen;  sie  diirften  also  im  Mai  1522  oder  bald 
danach  entstanden  sein.  Mit  grofiartiger  Gebarde  dankt  Cordus  dem  Goslarer 
Rat  fiir  seine  Forderung  der  Dichtkunst.  So  reiche  Gabe  fiir  so  wertlose  Verse; 
solan ge  er  dichten  konne,  werde  er  den  Goslarern  seinen  Dank  abstatten.  Eines 
der  nachsten  Gedichte  macht  die  Drohung  wahr.  In  einem  Zwiegesprach  zwi- 
schen  dem  Dichter  und  einem  Freund  wird  die  Hohe  des  Honorars  erortert. 


310  EURICIUS  CORDUS 

Cordus  lafit  seinen  Gesprachspartner  raten,  wieviel  den  Stadtvatern  von  Gos- 
lar  die  Verherrlichung  ihres  Gemeinwesens  wert  war.  Der  rat  zunachst  runde 
Zahlen,  denkt  an  100  oder  200  Taler,  mufi  sich  aber  wiederholt  korrigieren 
lassen.  50?,  40?,  30?  — dann  weigert  sich  der  Freund,  eine  noch  geringere 
Summe  iiberhaupt  in  Erwagung  zu  ziehen.  Als  er  erfahrt,  dafi  dem  Dichter 
drei  Taler  verehrt  wurden,  bricht  er  in  die  Worte  aus 

O  in  perpetuos  huic  urbi  dedecus  annos 
Et  nulla  cessans  posteritate  pudor! 

Weitere  Epigramme  variieren  den  Vorwurf  und  geben  die  Stadt  der  Lacher- 
lichkeit  preis.  Warum,  so  fragt  Cordus,  bedurfte  es  einer  Abordnung  von  drei 
Biirgern,  ihm  das  Honorar  zu  iiberreichen?  Ein  kleines  Kind  hatte  doch 
miihelos  diese  Gabe  tragen  konnen.  Sind  denn  die  Burger  dieser  Stadt  so 
schwach?  Er  vergleicht  die  Schandsumme  von  drei  Talern  mit  der  Entloh- 
nung,  die  in  Goslar  fur  korperliche  Arbeit,  etwa  einem  Steinmetz,  gezahlt 
wird.  Wiitend  errechnet  er  aus  der  Relation  von  Verszahl  zu  Honorar,  dafi 
ein  einziger  seiner  Verse  nur  Bruchteile  eines  Hellers  wert  ist.  Von  Epigramm 
zu  Epigramm  werden  die  Spottgedichte  kiirzer,  die  Pointen  konzentrierter  und 
wirkungsvoUer;  der  erste  wortreiche  Arger  ist  von  der  Suche  nach  einer  aus- 
gefeilten  Formulierung  abgelost  und  scheint  verarbeitet.  Dennoch  handelt  es 
sich  bei  der  Serie  der  Goslargedichte  nicht  um  Stiliibungen.  Ihre  Veroffent- 
lichung  mit  der  Androhung  ewiger  Schande  sollte  auf  die  Ratsherren  anderer 
Stadte  einwirken,  sich  nicht  so  zu  verhalten  wie  die  verspotteten  Goslarer.  Man 
hat  den  aggressiven  Ton  dieser  Gedichte  stets  gespiirt.  Spatere  Ausgaben  der 
Epigramme,  wie  die  beiden  Helmstadter  Drucke  des  17.  Jahrhunderts,  haben 
den  Dichter  zensiert  und  die  Goslarer  Gedichte  ohne  jeden  Hinweis  elimi- 
niert.^  Um  den  unverfalschten  Cordus  zu  lesen,  mufi  man  auf  die  seltenen 
Erstausgaben  seiner  Werke  zuriickgreifen;  wie  Marburg  und  Berlin  beher- 
bergt  die  Wolfe nbiitteler  Bibliothek  einige  dieser  Drucke. 

Zu  den  sehr  seltenen,  in  die  Cordusausgaben  nicht  aufgenommenen  Car- 
mina  gehort  eine  weitere  Dichtung  aus  dem  Jahre  1522.  In  ihr  feiert  Cordus 
Friedrich  den  Weisen  als  Protektor  Luthers  und  Verfechter  der  evangelischen 
Wahrheit.*^  Ahnliche  Aufierungen  zur  Reformation  fmden  sich  mehrfach  in 
gleichzeitigen  Epigrammen  des  fiinften  Buches.  Im  44,  Epigramm  z.  B.  be- 
schreibt  er  ein  Gemalde,  das  den  Heiligen  Georg  im  Kampf  gegen  den  Drachen 
zeigt.  Die  "vetus  fabula"  der  Geschorenen,  so  seine  verachtliche  Bezeichnung 
fiir  die  Monche,  deutet  er  folgendermafien:  der  Drache  ist  der  alles  verschlin- 
gende  Papst  zu  Rom,  die  bedrohte  Jungfrau  ist  die  Kirche  Christi  und  der 
geriistete  Ritter  Georg,  der  ihr  zu  Hilfe  kommt,  ist  Martin  Luther.  Mit  solchen 
Aufierungen  erwarb  er  sich  nicht  iiberall  Freunde.  1523  stand  die  Stadt 
Braunschweig  keineswegs  im  Lager  der  Reformation.  Cordus,  der  mit  grofien 
Erwartungen  dorthin  gegangen  war,  stiefi  auf  eine  Biirgerschaft,  die  ihm  mit 
Reserve  gegeniibertrat  und  seine  arztlichen  Dienste  in  unerwartet  geringem 


PAUL  GERHARD  SCHMIDT 


3" 


Mafie  in  Anspruch  nahm.  In  den  Braunschweiger  Monchen  sah  Cordus  seine 
Gegner  und  Konkurrenten.  Uber  Monche,  die  als  Arzte  praktizierten,  hat 
er  sich  mehrfach  geaufiert,  so  in  dem  Epigramm  7,  67: 

Medicum  frequentes  feminae  monachum  petunt. 
Nil  suspicare:  aegros  domi  viros  habent. 

In  Lessings  Fassung: 

Frau  Trix  besucht  sehr  oft  den  jungen  Doktor  Klette. 
Argwohnet  nichts.  Ihr  Mann  liegt  wirklich  krank  zu  Bette. 

In  die  schwierigen  Braunschweiger  Jahre,  die  1527  mit  dem  Ruf  an  die  Uni- 
versitat  Marburg  ein  Ende  fanden,  fallt  Cordus'  Bruch  mit  Erasmus.  In  sechs 
Jahren  war  aus  einem  gliihenden  Verehrer  des  Erasmus  ein  Kritiker  und 
Spotter  iiber  dessen  laue  und  vorsichtige  Haltung  geworden.  1519  hatte  Cor- 
dus auf  die  falsche  Nachricht  vom  Tode  des  Erasmus  eine  Threnodie  verfafit, 
die  bisher  als  verloren  galt.^*  Sie  gelangte  zu  Erasmus  nach  Lowen,  der  sich 
bei  Cordus  mit  einem  Schreiben  bedankte,  das  dessen  hochstes  Entziicken 
hervorrief.^^  In  seiner  Palinodie,  dem  poetischen  Widerruf  der  Todesnach- 
richt,  gibt  er  seiner  Freude  Ausdruck:  "Ipse  Brabantino  mihi  scribit  Erasmus 
ab  orbe."^^  Weil  Erasmus  ihn  unter  seine  Freunde  zahlt,  kiifit  und  herzt  er 
den  Brief  und  betrachtet  ihn  als  seinen  grofiten  Schatz.  Bei  genauerer  Betrach- 
tung  erweist  aber  dieser  Brief  des  Erasmus  — die  Briefe  des  Cordus  sind  noch 
zu  fmden— ,  dafi  sich  hier  unterschiedliche  Temperamente  begegnen.  Erasmus 
rat  von  jeder  Polemik  ab.  Nach  seiner  Uberzeugung  weichen  die  Gespenster 
der  Finsternis  von  allein  vor  dem  klaren  Licht.  Es  ist  nicht  notig,  sie  zu 
bekampfen.  Ob  er  wufite,  dafi  Cordus  sich  durch  Fehden  hervorgetan  hatte? 
Die  Bucolica  des  Euricius  Cordus,  zur  Zeit  des  Erasmusbriefes  schon  zwei- 
mal  (1514;  1518)  im  Druck  erschienen,  legen  vom  streitbaren  Charakter  ihres 
Autors  ein  beredtes  Zeugnis  ab.  Die  Hirten  dieser  Eklogen  nehmen  zu  Zeit- 
fragen  deutlich  Stellung.  Die  sechste  Ekloge  ist  eine  einzige  Attacke  gegen  die 
Geistlichen;  die  neunte  fragt  nach  Grunden  fiir  die  Privilegien  des  Adels  und 
verweist  auf  die  Gleichheit  der  Menschen.  Derartig  sozialkritische  Elemente 
fehlen  der  fiinften  Ekloge;  sie  verarbeitet  einen  personlichen  Streit  des  Dich- 
ters  aus  seiner  Erfurter  Magisterzeit.  Ein  Hirte  berichtet  von  einem  Dichter- 
wettstreit  zwischen  dem  aufgeblasenen  Dichterling  Theon  und  dem 
sympathischen  Hirten  Lycidas,  in  dem  wir  unschwer  ein  Selbstportrat  des  Dich- 
ters  erkennen.  Lycidas  tragt  mit  einem  Epithalamium  auf  Johann  von  Sach- 
sen  den  Sieg  davon.  Sein  Gegner  Theon,  dem  man  den  Diebstahl  einer 
Hirtenflote  nachsagt,  rezitiert  Verse  aus  einer  Batrachomyomachia,  die  so  viele 
sprachliche  und  metrische  Schnitzer  enthalten,  dafi  alle  Hirten  in  Gelachter 
ausbrechen.  Unter  Theons  Gestalt  verbirgt  sich  der  aus  Gottingen  stammende 
Magister  Thilemann  Conradi  bzw.  Thiloninus  Philymnus,  der  eine  lateini- 
sche  Ubersetzung  der  Batrachomyomachia  publiziert  hatte,  die  ihm  nicht  nur  Spott 


312  '  EURICIUS  CORDUS 

iiber  seine  mangelnden  prosodischen  Kenntnisse,  sondern  auch  den  Vorwurf 
des  Plagiats  eintrug.  1513  hielt  Thiloninus  Philymnus  ohne  Erlaubnis  der  Uni- 
versitat  Vorlesungen  in  Erfurt  ab,  offensichdich  mit  Riickendeckung  durch 
eine  einflufireiche  Personlichkeit,  die  unter  dem  Namen  Momos  versteckt 
bleibt.  Zwischen  dem  Magister  und  Cordus  wurden  Invektiven  gewechselt, 
die  in  ihrer  Scharfe  zarteren  Naturen  wie  Mutian  und  Erasmus  nicht  beha- 
gen  konnten.  Nach  der  Vertreibung  des  Gegners  aus  Erfurt  ruhte  der  Streit 
nicht;  Cordus  replizierte  auf  dessen  Angriffe  mit  einer  Defensio  contra  maledicum 
Thiloninum  Philymnum,  einer  Sammlung  von  Epigrammen,  zu  der  sein  Freund 
Eobanus  Hessus  Vorrede  und  Nachwort  schrieb.  Auch  Hessus  erhebt  den  Vor- 
wurf des  Plagiats  gegen  Thiloninus  und  reklamiert  fiir  seinen  hessischen 
Landsmann  Cordus  den  Sieg  in  diesem  Streit  mit  den  Worten:  "sentiant  omnes, 
quam  grave  sit  Hessos  vincere."^^  Dieser  Streit,  der  in  keiner  Geschichte  der 
Universitat  Erfurt  iibergangen  wird,  hat  Cordus  zu  der  Dichtgattung  gefiihrt, 
die  seinen  Namen  beriihmt  machte.  In  Epigrammen,  die  an  Martial  und  an- 
deren  Vorbildern  geschult  sind,  greift  er  beispielsweise  den  Erasmusgegner  Ed- 
ward Lee  an,  verspottet  er  die  Bettelorden  und  einzelne  Gegner  der 
Reformation,  aber  auch  den  Kanzler  seiner  Universitat  und  ihm  mifiliebige 
Kollegen,  wobei  er  in  den  letzten  Fallen  vorsichtshalber  statt  der  wahren 
fingierte  Namen  verwendete.  Aufmerksame  Leser  seiner  Zeit  konnten  aber  die 
Gemeinten  erraten;  vereinzelt  fmden  sich  in  den  Druckexemplaren  handschrift- 
liche  Notizen,  in  denen  ein  solcher  fmgierter  Name  entschliisselt  wird.  So  ver- 
spricht  die  Beschaftigung  mit  den  Epigrammen  des  Euricius  Cordus  auch  einen 
Gewinn  fiir  die  Sozial-,  Universitats-  und  Reformationsgeschichte. 


Anmerkungen 

1.  p.  Albrecht,  Philologische  Untersuchungen,  Hamburg  1888  ff. 

2.  E.  Schmidt,  Lessing.  Geschichte  seines  Lebens  und  seiner  Schriften,  Berlin  1909,  1.  Bd., 
97. 

3.  Euricius  Cordus,  Epigrammata(1520),  hrsg.  von  K.  Krause,  Berlin  1892,  XXIX. 

4.  Krauses  Teiledition  (wie  Anm.  3)  erschien  als  Heft  5  der  von  Max  Herrmann 
und  Siegfried  Szamatolski  herausgegebenen  Lateinischen  Litteraturdenkmdler  des  XV.  und 
XVI.  Jahrhunderts .  Zum  Problem  der  Bucolica  vgl.  jetzt:  Gisela  Moncke,  "Der  hessische 
Humanist  Euricius  Cordus  und  die  Erstausgabe  seines  Bucolicon  von  1514,"  in:  Daph- 
nis  14,  1985,  65-98. 

5.  Es  fmdet  sich  in:  Euricii  Cordi  Simesusii  Germani  .  .  .  opera  poetica  omnia,  s.  1. 
(1564).  (Universitatsbibliothek  Marburg,  Sign.:  XVI  C  351'"^). 

6.  H.  Wiegand,  Hodoeporica.  Studien  zur  neulateinischen  Reisedichtung,  Baden-Baden  1984, 
470;  Contemporaries  of  Erasmus.  A  Biographical  Register  of  the  Renaissance  and  Reformation, 
Toronto  1985,  Bd.  1,  339. 

7.  W.  Hammer,  Latin  and  German  Encomia  of  Cities.  Diss.  phil.  Chicago  1937,  36; 


PAUL  GERHARD  SCHMIDT  313 


H.  Goldbrunner,  "Laudatio  urbis.  Zu  neueren  Untersuchungen  iiberdas  humsinistische 
Stadtelob,"  in:  Quellen  und  Forschungen  aus  italienischen  Archiven  und  Bibliotheken  63,  1983, 
313-28.  J.  Blansdorf  verdanke  ich  den  Hinweis  auf  Properz  4,  1  (Blick  auf  die  Stadt 
herab)  als  Parallele. 

8.  Zu  der  Belohnung,  die  Sannazaro  fiir  sein  Epigramm  "De  mirabili  urbe  Venetiis" 
erhielt,  vgl.  A.  Perosa  /  I.  Sparrow,  Renaissance  Latin  Verse,  London  1979,  150. 

9.  K.  Krause  (wie  Anm.  3)  XXXII  f. 

10.  Ad  Illustrissimum  Principem  loannem  Friderichum  Saxoniae  ducem,  quod  et  ipse  renascen- 
tem  iam  Evangelii  synceritatem  agnoscit  et  tuetur  Euricii  Cordi  Gratulatio,  Erfurt  1522  (Uni- 
versitatsbibliothek  Marburg,  Sign.:  XVI  C  351^^  );  S.  Brauer,  "Der  Humanist  Euricius 
Cordus  und  sein  neulateinisches  Epos  Antilutheromastix  von  1525,"  in:  Zeitschrift  Jrir  Kir- 
chengeschichte  85,  1974,  65-94. 

11.  H.-P.  Dilg,  "Die  Talinodia'  des  Euricius  Cordus  und  seine  Beziehung  zu  Er- 
asmus von  Rotterdam,"  in:  Alma  Mater  Philippina,  Wintersemester  1971  /  2,  31-34.  Uber 
die  von  mir  wiedergefundene  Threnodie  werde  ich  in  der  Festschrift  fiir  Paul  Raabe 
(1987)  berichten. 

12.  Opus  Epistolarum  D.  Erasmi Roterodami,  ed.  P.  S.  Allen,  Oxford  1913,  Bd.  3,  533, 
Nr.  941. 

13.  Cordus  (wie  Anm.  5)  79v. 

14.  Krause  (wie  Anm.  3)  V-VIII,  XXI-XXV;  H.  Volz,  "Der  Humanist  Tileman 
Conradi  aus  Gottingen,"  in:  Jahrbuch  der  Gesellschaft  fur  niedersdchsische  Kirchengeschichte 
65,  1967,  76-116. 


Some  Images  of  the  Conscience  in 
Emblem  Literature 

Peggy  Munoz  Simonds 

The  gloss  of  Romans  2:14-16  in  the  Geneva  Bible  informs  us  that 
"man's  conscience  sheweth  him  when  he  doeth  good  or  evil."  During 
the  Renaissance,  however,  there  were  three  different  ways  of  under- 
standing the  workings  of  this  inner  moral  faculty:  as  consciousness  of  past  sin, 
as  dread  of  retribution,  or  as  an  interior  warning  which  precedes  the  rational 
decision  to  act  against  the  moral  law.  Renaissance  emblem  literature  appears 
to  depict  all  three  meanings  of  conscience,  with  the  third  defmition  more  com- 
monly appearing  in  the  late  16th  and  ecirly  17th  century.  The  essential  dif- 
ference between  the  first  two  definitions  and  the  third  lies  in  a  shift  from  the 
earlier  classical  belief  that  man's  reason  knows  the  difference  between  good  and 
bad  and  is  capable  of  choosing  the  path  of  virtue,  to  the  later  Augustinian  no- 
tion that  reason  cannot  control  an  already  corrupted  will  and  that,  since  the 
Fall,  all  men  are  sinners  anyway,  whether  they  are  conscious  of  it  or  not.  In 
the  latter  case,  the  main  function  of  conscience  is  to  remind  the  sinner  sub- 
consciously of  a  continuing  need  for  repentance.  But,  no  matter  how  one  defined 
the  conscience  or  what  image  one  used  to  symbolize  its  workings,  Renaissance 
thinkers  agreed  that  conscience  could  produce  extreme  psychological  effects 
within  the  guilty  individual.  This  paper  will  survey  some  of  the  very  colorful 
images  in  Renaissance  emblems  portraying  the  conscience  and  the  way  it  af- 
fects us. 

First,  the  conscience  was  defined  as  a  mental  consciousness  of  moral  wrong- 
doing that  only  comes  into  action  cifter  the  evil  act  is  committed.  The  pangs 
of  a  bad  conscience  were,  therefore,  a  form  of  psychological  punishment  or 
remorse  which  the  sinner  tried  to  escape  through  inner  dissociation.  Accord- 
ing to  Renaissance  belief,  the  psyche  split  in  two  after  immorEil  behavior,  one 
part  of  the  mind  accusing  the  other  of  wrongdoing,  and  the  other  trying  des- 
perately to  escape  the  anguish  of  remorse.  To  symbolize  such  attempts  at  re- 
pressing guilty  thoughts,  Joachim  Camerarius  chose  the  image  of  a  bat  in 
Emblem  89,  Book  3,  of  his  Symbolarum  et  Emblematum  (1559).  The  inscriptio  above 


3l6  '  THE  CONSCIENCE  IN   EMBLEM  LITERATURE 

his  illustration  of  a  bat  in  flight  reads  "Inter  utrumque"  (Between  Both),  mean- 
ing between  day  and  night  and  between  bird  and  beast  (figure  1).  According 
to  the  subscriptio,  "Vita  fugit  lucem  dirae  male  conscia  culpae,  /  Ut  quae  avis 
a  sero  vespere  nomen  habet"  (The  soul  flees  from  the  light  of  a  grievous  sin, 
with  a  bad  conscience,  /  Like  the  bird  which  takes  its  name  [vespertilio]  from 
the  late  evening.)^  Camerarius  borrowed  his  image  from  Andrea  Alciati's  ear- 
lier Emblem  62  ("Aliud")  in  which  the  bird-beast  symbolizes,  among  other 
things,  a  man  of  bad  reputation,  or  more  specifically  a  debtor  fleeing  his  cred- 
itors and  thus  fearing  to  appear  in  public  during  the  daylight  hours. ^  This 
metaphor  of  the  bat  fleeing  from  the  light  was  easily  transformed  into  the  idea 
of  a  sinner  afraid  of  the  knowledge  of  his  own  sins. 

In  his  1564  Picta  Poesis,  Barthelemy  Aneau  used  the  mythological  image  of 
Ixion  bound  to  a  wheel  as  a  fitting  symbol  of  the  painful  inner  dissociation 
caused  by  a  bad  conscience  (fig.  2).  Under  Aneau's  inscriptio  "Sequitur  sua  poena 
nocentem"  (His  own  punishment  follows  the  Evil-doer),  the  subscriptio  of  Em- 
blem 30  states  in  translation  that. 

Conscious  of  his  sins,  his  own  heart  is  his  avenger. 
He  lives  an  unwanted  life,  for  he  prefers  not  to  live. 
And  while  he  longs  for  death,  he  feels  his  own  death- 
wounds, 
Yet  dies  not,  but  carries  his  torments  with  him. 
He  thinks  that  he  is  his  own  executioner:  he  wishes  to 

separate  himself  from  himself.  But  there  he  stays. 
And  constantly  revolves  like  a  poor  Ixion,  both  pursuing 

himself  and  fleeing  himself.^ 

Thus  when  the  faculty  of  conscience  brings  to  conscious  awareness  the  sense 
of  having  behaved  immorally,  the  mind  often  struggles  to  escape  from  this  know- 
ledge even  as  it  accuses  itself  of  guilt. 

However,  successful  repression  of  guilt  from  one's  conscious  mind  leads  di- 
rectly to  madness,  according  to  Nicholas  Reusner,  who  depicts  the  classical 
Furies  attacking  a  sinner  in  Emblem  10,  Book  3,  of  his  1581  Emblemata  (fig. 
3).  Under  the  motto  "Quisque  suos  patimur  manes"  (Each  of  Us  Suffers  Our 
Own  Ghosts),  Reusner  inscribes  the  following  verse: 

Daughters  of  Stygian  Night,  three  Furies:  fearful 

Megaera, 

Mournful  Alecto  and  raging  Tisiphone  — 

They  are  the  observers  of  crimes  and  the  avengers  of 

evils. 

Every  sin,  of  which  they  are  advised,  they  punish 

forthwith. 

They  inspire  melancholy,  madness  and  fear. 

They  inflict  dire  wounds  on  minds,  not  bodies. 


PEGGY  MUNOZ  SIMONDS  317 

Thus  their  serpents,  whips  and  fire-brands  are  these: 
When  the  sick  mind  of  man  can  fmd  no  rest.* 

This  notion,  deriving  from  the  myth  of  Orestes,  that  madness  was  the  effect 
of  a  bad  conscience,  unfortunately  led  to  the  widespread  Renaissance  belief 
that  insanity  was  God's  punishment  in  this  world  for  wrongdoing. 

Secondly,  conscience  was  thought  to  be  the  faculty  which  caused  the  sinner 
to  become  fearful  of  retribution,  either  here  or  in  the  next  world.  Even  those 
who  were  incapable  of  feeling  true  remorse  for  their  bad  deeds  succumbed  to 
this  terror.  Thus  Guillaume  de  la  Perriere,  whose  1539  collection  of  French 
emblems  was  translated  into  English  by  Thomas  Combe  in  1593  as  The  Theater 
of  Fine  Devices,  saw  conscience  as  an  internal  mechanism  which  prevents  the 
guilty  from  sleeping  (fig.  4).  The  inscriptio  of  Perriere's  Emblem  61  tells  us  that 
"The  man  whose  conscience  is  vnpure,  /  In  his  own  mind  he  is  not  sure."  The 
image  of  this  state  is  that  of  a  wakeful  hare  about  to  be  attacked  by  hounds, 
and  the  verse  says, 

The  wicked  man  whose  faults  are  manifest 

Seemes  like  the  Hare  still  full  of  feare  and  dread: 

He  dares  not  sleepe  nor  take  his  quiet  rest. 

For  doubt  before  some  Justice  to  be  led. 

The  honest  life  who  leades  is  better  blest: 

He  euermore  secure  may  keepe  his  bed, 
The  while  the  wicked  studie  and  deuise 
Like  fearefull  Hares  to  sleepe  with  open  eyes.^ 

Shakespeare's  Macbeth,  murderer  of  sleep,  is  a  good  example  in  literature  of 
the  remorseless  wrongdoer  suffering  from  such  dread.  Thus  to  have  a  bad  con- 
science is  consciously  to  fear  retribution,  either  from  those  one  has  harmed 
or  from  supernatural  sources,  and  eventually  to  succumb  to  despair. 

Mathias  Holtzwart  repeats  this  notion  in  his  Emblematum  Tyrocinia,  first  pub- 
lished in  1543.  Under  the  motto  "Conscience,  a  Thousand  Witnesses,"  we  see 
the  pictura  of  a  fleeing  dog  with  a  rattle  tied  to  its  tail  (fig.  5).  The  subscriptio 
reminds  us  that. 

Whoever  you  are  — pauper,  rich  man,  happy,  wretched, 

or  in 

Whatever  condition  God  wills  you  to  be. 
Let  your  conscience  be  your  guide,  so  that  without  fear 

You  can  lay  hold  of  life  with  a  joyful  countenance. 
For  just  as,  if  you  inflate  a  bladder 

With  a  few  peas  in  it  and  tie  it  to  a  dog's  tail,  he 
Will  run  through  the  streets,  the  house,  and  over  the 

fields, 

Fleeing  he  knows  not  what,  but  still  always  fleeing, 


3l8  THE  CONSCIENCE  IN  EMBLEM  LITERATURE 

So  he  whom  conscience  troubles  can  never  rest 
And  is  terrified  by  the  threat  of  2iny  shadow.^ 

Despite  the  forcefulness  of  Hohzwart's  image,  the  moralizing  verse  offers  no 
remedy  for  the  fear  of  retribution  to  be  suffered  after  moral  wrongdoing.  This 
appears  to  be  typical  of  early  16th-century  emblems. 

Condemned  to  dread,  the  sinner  soon  becomes  afraid  of  everything  in  the 
external  world.  Geffrey  Whitney  depicts  just  such  a  haunted  man  in  A  Choice 
ofEmblemes.  The  terrified  wrongdoer  with  an  upraised  sword  is  about  to  strike 
his  own  shadow,  while  — in  the  upper  lefthand  corner  of  the  /?zdMra— Jupiter 
sits  on  the  back  of  his  eagle  and  throws  lightning  bolts  at  the  sinner  (fig.  6). 
The  first  verse  of  the  emblem  reads, 

The  wicked  wretche,  that  mischiefe  late  hath  wroughte, 

By  murder,  thefte,  or  other  heynous  crimes. 

With  troubled  minde,  hee  dowtes  hee  shalbe  caughte 

And  leaues  the  waie,  and  ouer  hedges  climes: 

And  standes  in  feare,  of  euerie  busshe,  and  brake. 
Yea  oftentimes,  his  shaddowe  makes  him  quzike. 

Then  Whitney  reminds  us  of  the  contrasting  Horatian  analogy  that, 

A  conscience  cleare,  is  like  a  wall  of  brasse, 
That  dothe  not  shake,  with  euerie  shote  that  hittes: 
Eauen  so  there  by,  our  liues  wee  quiet  passe. 
When  guiltie  minds,  are  rack'de  with  fearfull  fittes: 
Then  keepe  thee  pure,  and  soile  thee  not  with  sinne. 
For  after  guilte,  thine  inwarde  greifes  beginne. 

Whitney  cites  as  the  source  of  his  emblem  Cato's  warning  that  "Conscius  ipse 
sibi  de  se  putat  omnia  dici"  (One  who  is  conscious  of  his  own  guilt  thinks  that 
everything  proclaims  it).^ 

On  the  other  hand,  emblem  literature  also  produced  multiple  images  of  a 
sound  conscience,  that  is,  the  peace  of  knowing  that  one  has  not  committed 
any  immoralities  and  that  one  is  secure  in  his  own  virtue.  Such  images  were 
of  course  employed  by  Renaissance  emblematists  as  moral  exhortations  to  their 
readers  to  be  virtuous.  Instead  of  threatening  mental  anguish  as  a  punishment 
for  wrongdoing,  these  emblems  praised  the  rewards  to  the  psyche  of  virtue. 
Be  good,  they  suggested,  and  you  will  feel  good. 

For  example,  under  the  motto  "Conscientia  integra,  laurus"  (A  whole  con- 
science, a  bay-tree),  Johannes  Sambucus  compares  a  good  conscience  to  the 
laurel  tree,  which  was  believed  to  protect  one  from  lightning  or  the  vengeance 
of  Jupiter,  according  to  Pliny  and  other  authorities.  Henry  Green  translates 
the  complex  subscriptio  as  follows: 


PEGGY   MUNOZ  SIMONDS  319 

Spread  out  flourishing  heaven  I  survey,  nor  do  Ughtnings 

terrify, 
Though  for  crime's  sake  the  father  hurls  them  from 

citadels  on  high, 
Yea  even  with  my  leaves  I  crackle,  and  although  burnt 
Daphne  I  name,  v^hom  the  master's  love  so 

importuned. 
So  conscious  virtue  strengthens,  and  placed  far  from 

destruction 
Pleasing  my  state  is  to  powers  above,  and  long  time  is 

flourishing. 
Men's  voices  he  never  fears,  nor  the  weapons  of  fire. 
Who  hath  girded  his  mind  round  with  snow-bright 

love. 
This  mind  the  raging  Eumenides  will  not  distress,  nor  the 

home 
For  the  sad  and  the  guiltless  overturn'd  without  cause. 
Even  the  hoary  swan  worn  out  in  inactive  old  age 
Gives  forth  admonitions,  as  it  sings  from  a  stifling 

throat; 
Pure  of  heart  with  its  mate  conversing,  it  washes  in 

water, 
And  morals  of  clearest  hue  in  due  form  rehearses. 
Who  repents  of  unlawful  life,  and  whom  conscious  errors 
Do  not  oppress,— that  man  sings  forth  hymns 

everlasting.^ 

Thus  the  man  who  is  conscious  of  virtue  rather  than  of  sin  faces  both  life  and 
death  without  fear  or  mental  anguish.  Sambucus  also  offers  the  possibility  of 
repentance  to  the  sinner  as  a  means  of  escape  from  the  fear  of  retribution.  (In 
1586  Whitney  uses  the  same  woodcut  as  Sambucus  of  a  man  clinging  to  a  lau- 
rel tree  with  Jupiter  and  a  swan  in  the  background  for  his  Emblem  67  [fig. 

7].)' 

Another  Sambucus  emblem  imaginatively  compares  a  good  conscience  to 

a  rolled  up  hedgehog  presenting  its  spines  to  the  dangers  of  the  world  (fig.  8). 
The  inscriptio  is  "Conscientia  mille  testes"  ("Conscience,  a  thousand  witnesses"). 
According  to  the  subscriptio: 

No  fitting  words  injure  virtue  by  their  snappishness, 
Nor  do  any  winds  disturb  the  cliffs. 
As  the  hedgehog  holds  itself  together  when  harassed, 
And  is  neither  easily  harmed  nor  disturbed  by  threats, 
So  too  the  mind  conscious  of  the  eternal  and  the  true 
Always  holds  its  own  against  falsehoods. 


320  THE  CONSCIENCE  IN   EMBLEM  LITERATURE 

Bring  forth  a  thousand  witnesses  and  a  thousand  trials; 
It  shrugs  them  off,  if  mad  rage  acts  not  against  it 

within.  ^^ 

A  good  conscience  then  is  actually  seen  as  a  defense  against  the  external  stresses 
of  life,  and  it  helps  to  prevent  madness.  Thus  for  the  Renaissance,  virtue  rather 
than  expensive  psychotherapy  can  result  in  sound  mental  health. 

In  a  similar  vein,  Florentius  Schoonhovius  compares  a  good  conscience  to 
the  kingfisher  or  halcyon  bird,  since  "A  good  conscience  is  secure  in  the  midst 
of  disasters"— the  inscriptio  of  his  Emblem  49.  The  pictura  illustrates  the  nest 
of  the  halcyon  bird  floating  on  a  calm  sea  (fig.  9),  while  the  subscriptio  says  that. 

The  kingfisher  likes  to  lay  its  eggs  in  the  midst  of  a  calm  sea  and,  sitting 
over  them,  hatches  tender  chicks  and  keeps  them  warm  until  they  know 
the  unaccustomed  efforts  of  flying.  Those  with  innocent  souls,  unstained 
by  sins,  rejoice  even  in  the  midst  of  their  enemies;  for  they  have  ever- 
lasting joy  in  themselves  and  in  the  fortress  of  their  vigorous  spirit,  which 
the  enemy  cannot  approach.  ^^ 

In  his  commentary,  Schoonhovius  cites  Pliny  (Bk.  10,  chap.  32)  to  the  effect 
that  "Halcyons  or  kingfishers  build  their  nests  in  the  midst  of  the  sea,  and  in 
mid-winter,  at  which  time  the  sea  is  most  agitated  by  the  force  of  the  winds. 
But  then  the  winds  die  down,  and  the  kingfisher  sits  for  seven  days,  hatching 
indeed  as  many  chicks;  and  since  they  yearn  for  food,  God  generously  gives 
seven  more  days  to  the  tiny  animal  so  that  the  chicks  can  grow.  All,  therefore, 
who  entrust  themselves  to  the  sea  observe  this  phenomenon  and  call  those  days 
'Halcyon  days.'  " 

Schoonhovius  argues  further  that  these  birds  are  a  fitting  symbol  for  a  good 
conscience  because  they  stand  fast  in  great  depths  surrounded  by  both  friends 
and  foes.  But  the  conscience  is  also  like  a  huge  rock: 

a  rock  rising  in  the  midst  of  the  sea,  planted  with  the  deepest  roots,  whose 
summit  the  waves  cannot  even  reach,  is  battered  by  them  below,  not  so 
that  they  disturb  it  but  that  they  themselves  are  broken  up.  The  Poets 
tell  us  that  the  top  of  Olympus  is  always  quiet,  because  it  is  higher  than 
the  force  of  winds  and  weather  can  reach:  thus  too,  a  good  conscience 
is  too  sublime  and  lofty  to  feel  the  calumnies  of  unjust  men. 

Perhaps  the  most  curious  metaphor  used  by  Schoonhovius  in  his  commentary 
is  his  comparison  between  a  good  conscience  and  the  drug  Nepenthe,  which 
according  to  Homer  dispels  all  sadness  and  anxiety:  "And  surely  it  follows  of 
necessity  that  wherever  a  pure  spirit  is,  there  God  is,  and  wherever  God  is, 
there  is  paradise,  there  is  heaven,  there  is  true  happiness."'^  Thus  a  good  con- 
science equates  both  with  safety  amid  dangers  and  with  inner  joy,  and  the  two 
states  are  known  consciously  by  the  virtuous  man  or  woman.  In  other  words, 


PEGGY  MUNOZ  SIMONDS 


321 


a  good  conscience  is  a  natural  tranquillizer  which  results  in  a  socially  accept- 
able euphoria. 

By  the  late  16th  century,  however,  some  Renaissance  writers  understood 
the  conscience  to  precede  consciousness  as  an  inner  guide  to  human  under- 
standing and  thus  to  human  behavior.  The  third  definition  of  conscience,  there- 
fore, is  that  of  an  innate  moral  sense  given  to  us  by  God  in  conjunction  with 
reason.  For  example,  in  his  A  Discourse  of  Conscience  (1596),  the  English  Cal- 
vinist  William  Perkins  argues  that  conscience  is  "a  natural  power,  faculty,  or 
created  quality,  from  which  knowledge  and  judgement  proceed  as  effects. "^^ 
Once  conscience  is  thought  of  as  a  subconscious  faculty  that  helps  reason  to 
determine  consciously  what  is  virtuous  or  not  virtuous  rather  than  as  our  know- 
ledge of  past  good  or  evil  behavior,  it  becomes  obvious  to  some  17th-century 
emblematists  that  a  true  Christian  can  never  actually  be  in  the  halcyon  state 
of  good  conscience  described  by  Schoonhovius.  Since  the  Fall  of  Adam,  all  men 
have  been  sinners,  wandering  naked  in  a  moral  wilderness,  their  inward  parts 
gnawed  at  by  the  serpents  of  lust  and  guilt  — or  so  Henry  Peacham  depicted 
the  human  condition  in  his  "Icon  Peccati"  emblem  (fig.  10),  which  is  directly 
borrowed  from  Cesare  Ripa's  Iconologia  (1603).  Peacham's  verse  reads  as  follows: 

A  young  man  blind,  black,  naked  here  is  scene. 
Ore  Mountaine  steepe,  and  Thornie  Rock  to  passe, 
Whose  heart  a  Serpent  gnawes  with  surie  teene, 
Another's  wound  about  his  wast;  alas, 

Since  Adam's  fall,  such  our  estate  hath  bin 

The  liuely  picture  of  our  guilt  and  sinne. 

His  age  denotes  youthes  foUies  and  amisse. 

His  blindnes  shewes,  our  want  to  wisedomes  sight; 

Sinnes  deadly  waies,  those  dang'rous  stepps  of  his, 

His  nakednes,  of  grace  depriued  quite: 

Hell's  power  the  Serpent,  which  his  loines  doth  girt 
A  Conscience  bad,  the  other  eates  his  heart.'* 

Taking  St.  Augustine  very  literally,  the  Protestant  emblematist  shares  the  saint's 
belief  that  the  human  psyche  is  naturally  corrupted  and  can  only  be  saved 
through  divine  grace;  thus  one  image  of  a  bad  conscience  for  Peacham  is  the 
serpent  of  Eden. 

Peacham  also  suggests  that  there  is  a  cause  and  a  remedy  for  such  suffering 
in  his  emblem  of  the  stricken  deer,  "Nusquam  tuta"  (Nowhere  safe).  The  sub- 
scriptio  is  based  on  a  Latin  verse  (bk.  1.15)  from  the  Basilikon  Doron  by  James  I: 

Dictaeus  volucri  quam  fixit  arundine  pastor 

Cerva  fugit,  nullis  convalicura  locis; 
Conscia  mens  sceleris  quem  torquet,  vbique  pererrat, 

Vulnere  neglecto  quod  miser  intus  alit. 


322  THE  CONSCIENCE  IN   EMBLEM  LITERATURE 

Peacham's  version  of  this  Petrarchan  image  (fig.  11)  states  that, 

The  silly  Hind  among  the  thickets  greene, 
While  nought  mistrusting  did  at  safetie  goe, 
His  mortal  wound  receiu'd  with  arrow  keene 
Sent  singing  from  a  Sheepeheard's  secret  bowe; 

And  deadly  peirc'd,  can  in  no  place  abide, 

But  runnes  about  with  arrow  in  her  side. 

So  oft  we  see  the  man  whome  Conscience  bad 

Doth  inwardly  with  deadly  torture  wound. 

From  place  to  place  to  range  with  Furie  mad, 

And  seeke  his  ease  by  shifting  of  his  ground 

The  meane  neglecting  which  might  heale  the  sinne. 
That  howerly  ranckles  more  and  more  within.  ^^ 

Thus  the  pangs  of  conscience  are  lovingly  sent  by  the  good  shepherd  Christ 
to  drive  man  toward  the  means  of  his  salvation. 

The  stricken  and  thirsty  stag  in  Emblem  16  of  Daniel  Heinsius'  1606  Em- 
blemata  amatoria  finally  drinks  from  a  stream  and  thus  recreates  himself,  an  em- 
blem suggestive  of  the  saving  power  of  God's  love  for  the  guilty  soul.  According 
to  the  subscriptio, 

As  the  frigid  stream  refreshes  the  weary  stag, 
When  the  wild  tumult  of  the  chase  permits  it. 
So  too  you  are  able  to  refresh  the  weary;  but 
You  act  by  a  greater  stream:  you  exhaust  and  also 

refresh  in  the  same  way.^^ 

Similarly,  the  remedy-seeking  stag  of  Herman  Hugo's  Pia  desideria  (1628)  de- 
picts Anima  on  the  back  of  a  wounded  deer  which  leaps  toward  the  fountain 
of  salvation,  an  image  employed  as  well  by  Francis  Quarles  in  1635. 

In  conclusion,  some  emblematists  of  the  late  16th  and  early  17th  centuries 
pictured  the  pangs  of  conscience  as  an  internal  warning  of  sinfulness  in  all 
men  — a  warning  even  to  those  who  considered  themselves  virtuous,  since  all 
men  and  women  shared  in  the  Fall  of  Adam  and  Eve.  Evidently,  it  was  be- 
coming apparent  that  the  classical  idea  of  virtu,  so  celebrated  by  the  human- 
ists, was  not  really  applicable  to  the  Renaissance  Christian.  No  matter  how 
noble  he  might  strive  to  be  in  his  external  life,  internally  he  was  always  guilty, 
a  helpless  party  to  the  universal  Fall  of  Man,  and  thus  to  the  pangs  of  an  un- 
easy conscience. 

Johann  Mannich  sums  up  this  view  of  the  human  condition  in  a  1624  em- 
blem based  on  1  Corinthians  4:21:  "What  will  ye?  shall  I  come  unto  you  with 
a  rod  or  in  love,  and  in  the  spirit  of  meekness?"  The  pictura  illustrates  a  man 
and  a  dog  sleeping.  To  their  right,  a  hand  wields  a  bundle  of  rods  and,  to  the 


o 

> 

> 

& 


I 


5*^ 


h  -•  -*<  V  *  ^ 


bo 


bo 


•is 

I 

i 
t 

i 


?^^^ 


ho 


bo 


IT! 


XI 

'S 

•  \ 

c 

k 

rt 

^ 

csi 

• 

-^ 

^■1 

bb 

> 

fe 

bo 


PEGGY   MUNOZ   SIMONDS  329 

left,  another  hand  holds  out  a  light  (fig.  12).  The  circular  inscriptio  reads,  "Mor- 
det  Mens  Conscia  Tandem"  (Conscience  Eventually  Bites).  However,  the  em- 
blem as  a  whole  suggests  that  conscience  is  two-fold:  it  can  be  either  a  scourge 
or  the  light  of  salvation.  Indeed,  Mannich  also  directs  the  reader's  attention 
to  the  text  for  the  third  Sunday  after  Trinity,  Luke  15,  in  which  Jesus  gathers 
together  the  publicans  and  the  sinners  to  hear  his  hopeful  parable  of  the  lost 
sheep.  The  subscriptio  of  the  emblem  explains  the  picture: 

Here  he  lies  snoring  while  sleep  floods  through  his  body; 

But  how  quickly  will  he  wake  up  when  the  dog  barks? 
When  the  law  summons  you  out  of  your  sleep  for  your 

sins,  rise  up;  take  hold  of 

The  light  of  the  Evangelist:  thus  you  will  be  saved. ^^ 

The  word  "Lucem"  or  light  is  of  course  a  pun  on  the  name  of  the  Evangelist 
Luke,  whose  words,  the  pious  emblematist  believed,  could  transform  the  an- 
guish of  a  guilty  conscience  into  a  lover's  joy.  For  Mannich,  the  unconscious 
terrors  of  the  night,  or  the  apparently  inescapable  fears  of  a  guilty  conscience, 
are  actually  loving  messages  from  the  diety  to  the  unconscious  mind  of  fallen 
humanity  that  the  conscious  mind  can  fmd  comfort  and  intellectual  enlight- 
enment in  the  Gospels,  if  it  so  chooses. 

Montgomery  College,  MD 


Notes 


1.  Joachim  Camerarius,  Symbolorum  et  Emblematum  (Nuremberg,  1559),  bk.  3,  p.  89. 
Unless  otherwise  noted,  all  translations  from  Latin  to  English  in  this  paper  are  by  Roger 
T.  Simonds. 

2.  See  Emblem  62  by  Andrea  Alciati,  Emblemata  cum  Commentariis  (Padua,  1621),  p. 
281. 

3.  Barthelemy  Aneau,  Picta  Poesis  (Lyons,  1564),  p.  30.  An  earlier  edition  appeared 
in  1552. 

4.  Nicholas  Reusner,  Emblemata  (Frankfort,  1581),  p.  116. 

5.  Thomas  Combe,  The  Theater  of  Fine  Devices  (London:  Richard  Field,  1614),  sig. 
E4  verso. 

6.  See  the  Huntington  Library  copy  of  Mathias  Holtzwart,  Emblematum  Tyrocinia: 
sive  Picta  Poesis  latinogermanica  (Strassburg:  Bernard  Jobin,  1581),  sig.  J3. 

7.  Geffrey  Whitney,  A  Choice  of  Emblemes  (Leyden:  Christopher  Plantin,  1586),  p.  32. 

8.  Henry  Green,  Shakespeare  and  the  Emblem  Writers  (London:  Trubner  &  Co.,  1870), 
pp.  422-23. 

9.  Whitney,  p.  67. 

10.  Johannes  Sambucus,  Emblemata  (Antwerp:  Christopher  Plantin,  1576),  p.  221. 


33°  THE  CONSCIENCE  IN   EMBLEM   LITERATURE 

11.  Florentius  Schoonhovius,  Emblemata  (Gouda,  1618),  p.  147. 

12.  Ibid.,  p.  148. 

13.  William  Perkins,  A  Discourse  of  Conscience  {Cambridge:  ]ohn  Legate,  1596),  p.  2. 

14.  Henry  Peacham,  Minerva  Britanna  (English  Emblem  Books  No.  5,  Scolar  Press, 
1612),  p.  146. 

15.  Ibid.,  p.  4. 

16.  Heinsius,  Daniel  Emblemata  amatoria  (Amsterdam,  1606),  p.  16. 

17.  Johann  Mannich,  Sacra  emblemata  (Nuremberg:  John  Frederick  Sartori,  1624), 
p.  26. 


Latin  Translations  of  Ronsard 
Malcolm  C.  Smith 

From  the  outset  of  his  career,  Ronsard  repeatedly  claimed  that  he  would 
enjoy  worldwide  renown  for  his  poems.  ^  However,  he  was  sufficiently 
realistic  to  acknowledge  that  Latin  translations  of  these  poems  con- 
tributed significantly  to  his  fame.  He  took  a  pride  in  these  translations,  as  can 
be  seen  from  remarks  he  addressed  to  Henry  III  about  translations  oi  L'Hydre 
deffaict,  a  1569  poem  in  praise  of  victories  over  the  Reformers: 

[Ronsard]  vous  fit  un  tel  hymne, 
Que  I'arrogance  Grecque,  et  la  grandeur  Latine, 
Le  voulurent  tourner,  et  sema  par  ses  vers 
Vostre  nom  admirable  en  ce  grand  univers.^ 

While  he  does  not  appear  to  have  produced  Latin  translations  of  his  own  poems 
(curiously,  as  he  did  write  a  fair  amount  of  Latin  poetry),  he  at  least  once  ex- 
pressed delight  at  the  efforts  of  a  translator  of  his  poems. ^ 

Ian  McFarlane  has  established  a  very  valuable  checklist  of  Latin  transla- 
tions of  Ronsard  which  comprises  41  items  published  between  1555  and  1596 
in  the  works  of  Ronsard  and  in  sixteen  other  publications.  He  lists  also  a  further 
32  translations  extant  in  manuscript,  all  but  two  of  them  in  the  British  Li- 
brary's manuscript  of  translations  by  Francois  de  Thoor.*  I  shall  be  mention- 
ing eighteen  more  translations  of  poems  or  parts  of  poems  which  I  have  seen 
in  six  separate  publications,  another  publication  (which  I  have  not  seen)  con- 
taining a  number  of  translations  of  passages  of  the  Franciade,  an  unknown  man- 
uscript translation,  and  finally  two  more  translations  which  could  well  have 
been  printed  but  which  no-one  seems  to  have  located.  My  survey,  like  McFar- 
lane's,  is  chronological  by  date  of  publication. 

In  1558,  there  appeared  Jean  Dorat's  translation,  into  164  lines  of  Latin  verse, 
of  Ronsard's  Exhortation  au  camp  du  roy.  The  pamphlet  in  which  it  appeared  is 
titled  Ronsardi  exhortatio  ad  milites  Gallos.  This  translation  is  not  unknown,  for 
Ronsard's  most  famous  editor,  Paul  Laumonier,  referred  to  it,  but  McFarlane 


332  '  LATIN  TRANSLATIONS  OF  RONSARD 

only  mentions  the  1586  edition  in  Dorat's  Poematia.  The  1558  edition  is  im- 
portant in  that  it  appeared  while  the  material  in  the  poem  was  still  topical. 
Laumonier  observed  that  the  French  poem  was  composed  in  the  last  week  of 
August  1558,  when  a  decisive  battle  between  the  French  and  the  Spanish  was 
anticipated,  and  he  surmised,  very  plausibly,  that  the  Latin  translation  was 
composed  for  the  benefit  of  foreign  troops  in  the  French  army.^ 

Another  political  poem  translated  into  Latin  was  the  Priere  a  Dieu  pour  la 
victoire  (1569).  In  this  case,  the  French  text  and  the  Latin  translation  (which 
is  in  147  lines  by  Antoine  Valet)  were  published  on  facing  pages  of  the  same 
pamphlet.  Here,  again,  the  material  is  topical,  dealing  with  an  imminent  bat- 
tle in  the  third  civil  war.  The  importance  of  topicality  is  illustrated  by  the  fact 
that  by  the  time  this  prayer  for  victory  was  printed,  the  victory  itself  had  ma- 
terialised (at  Montcontour  on  3rd  October),  and  so  the  astute  printer,  Gervais 
Mallot,  altered  the  title  to  Chant  triumphal  sur  la  victoire: 

Another  1569  publication  containing  a  Latin  translation  of  Ronsard  is 
Scevole  de  Sainte-Marthe's  Les  premieres  oeuvres  f.  .  .]  qui  contienent  ses  Imitations 
et  Traductions  recueillies  de  divers  Po'etes  Grecs  et  Latins,  wherein  Sainte-Marthe  trans- 
lates a  sonnet  by  Ronsard  dedicated  to  Jodelle.^  According  to  Claude  Faisant, 
Sainte-Marthe  also  translated  several  passages  of  Ronsard's  Franciade.  Faisant 
does  not  give  details  of  these  translations  other  than  that  they  appeared  in  a 
volume  titled  Poetica  paraphrasis  [.  .  .]  Sylvarum  libri  II,  and  that  they  were  pre- 
faced by  a  poem  tided  In  versos  aliquot  ex  P.  Ronsardi  Franciade  latinos  a  sejactos, 
of  which  he  cites  an  extract.^  The  relationship  between  Sainte-Marthe  and 
Ronsard  was  clearly  a  very  cordial  and  mutually  admiring  one.^ 

In  1571 ,  there  appeared  Barthelemy  Faye's  Energumenicus  and  Alexicacus,  two 
books  on  exorcism  published  in  one  volume.  Faye's  purpose  was  to  refute  the 
claims  of  the  Reformers.  The  Alexicacus  contains  a  Latin  translation  from  Ron- 
sard's  Continuation  du  Discours  des  miseres.  The  passage  is  cited  to  m2ike  the  point 
that  if  Catholic  pastors  had  cared  for  their  flocks,  the  heretical  "wolves"  would 
not  have  wreaked  such  havoc.  The  same  work  contains,  as  part  of  the  per- 
oration, a  translation  from  the  Remonstrance  aupeuple  de  France.  Ronsard  is  cited, 
I  would  think,  not  just  because  his  material  is  apposite,  but  also  because  his 
renown  as  a  Catholic  controversialist  lent  impact  to  Faye's  case.  Faye  himself 
is  the  translator  of  the  extracts. ^^ 

The  next  Latin  translation  offers  a  further  example  of  the  use  of  Ronsard's 
text  to  make  an  ideological  point  — and  a  particularly  interesting  example,  for 
it  concerns  use  of  his  text  by  his  political  and  religious  adversaries,  the  Re- 
formers. The  unidentified  author  of  a  compilation  published  in  1574  and  tit- 
led Dialogi  ab  Eusebio  Philadelpho  cosmopolita  in  Gallorum  et  caeterorum  nationum  gratiam 
compositi  cites,  in  a  total  of  109  lines  of  Latin  verse,  seven  extracts  from  Ron- 
sard's Franciade}^  The  author  presents  Ronsard's  denunciations  of  Childeric 
and  Chilperic  as  though  these  passages  had  been  intended  to  be  attacks  upon 
Charles  IX,  and  he  presents  Ronsard's  indictment  of  Brunhilda  as  though  his 


MALCOLM  C.    SMITH  333 

"real"  target  had  been  Catherine  de  Medicis.^^  The  translator  is  not  named: 
he  might  well  be  the  unidentified  author  of  the  rest  of  the  book.  This  book  — a 
French  version  also  appeared  —  was  issued  by  the  Reformers  in  the  aftermath 
of  the  St.  Bartholomew's  Day  massacres.  It  is  virtually  inconceivable  that  Ron- 
sard  intended  the  passages  of  the  Franciade  to  be  read  as  attacks  on  the  court, 
even  though  he  almost  certainly  deplored  the  massacres  and  was  also  capable 
of  conveying  political  messages  allusively.  ^^ 

In  1614,  a  Latin  translation  of  Florimond  de  Raemond's  history  of  the  Re- 
formation appeared  in  Cologne.  Raemond,  like  his  friend  Michel  de  Montaigne, 
read  Ronsard's  poems  against  the  Reformers  and,  like  Montaigne,  cited  them 
in  his  own  work.  Raemond  had  cited  six  extracts  from  Ronsard  in  his  Histoire 
de  rheresie,  and  they  are  rendered  into  rather  laborious  Latin  by  an  unnamed 
translator.  Four  of  the  six  translated  passages  are  from  poems  by  Ronsard 
against  the  Reformers,  and  there  is  again  a  highly  apposite  integration  of  Ron- 
sard's  own  defence  of  the  Catholic  faith  into  the  work  of  another  polemicist.^* 
The  total  length  of  the  Latin  text  is  41  lines. 

I  can  add  just  one  more  item  to  McFarlane's  list  of  manuscript  translations. 
It  is  a  highly  interesting  one,  since  the  poem  by  Ronsard  upon  which  it  is  based 
is  lost.  It  is  titled  In  tumulum  cordis  Francisci  Lothareni  Ducis  Guisiaci  Ex  Gallico 
P.  Ronsardi,  and  reads  as  follows: 

Guisiade  iacet  hie  Francisci  cor  Lothareni, 

Illius  invicti  magnanimique  ducis. 
Cor,  Gallorum  in  quo  vitae  spes  omnis,  et  omnis 

Spes  rebus  dubiis  certa  salutis  erat. 
Cor  nunquam  trepidans  ad  aliqua  pericula,  et  hostes 

Usque  sua  cogens  vis  trepidare  metu. 
Cor,  quod  pro  patriisque  focis  dum  pugnat  et  aris 

Vi  vincens,  victis  victima  fraude  cadit. 
Tale  cor  haud  iacet  hie  breve  mole,  sed  ampla  capaxque 

Omnis  vertutis  consiliique  domus. 
Denique  cor  iacet  hie  centena  quod  intus  habebat 

Corda  sua,  et  populi  non  numeranda  sui. 
Hoc  quae  cuncta  uno  cum  corde  sepulta  iacerent 

Si  possent  uno  cuncta  iacere  loco. 
Quod  quia  non  licuit,  non  cor,  sed  cordis  inanis 

Umbra  sub  hoc  vacuo  marmore  clausa  latet. 
At  cor  Guisiaci  verum  Ducis  omnia  corda 

Gaillorum,  vera  et  viva  sepulchra  tegunt. 

The  manuscript,  which  is  in  the  Bibliotheque  Nationale  in  Paris,  does  not  iden- 
tify the  translator.*^  It  is  very  plausible  that  Ronsard  did  indeed  compose  the 
epitaph  on  which  this  translation  is  based,  for  two  other  epitaphs  of  Frangois 
de  Guise  by  him  are  known.  *^  The  assassination  of  Guise  in  1563  was  an  im- 


334  LATIN  TRANSLATIONS  OF  RONSARD 

portant  political  event  (he  had  been  a  member  of  the  Catholic  "Triumvirate" 
which  opposed  the  Reformers  in  the  Civil  War  of  1562),  and  so  we  have  here 
another  politically-motivated  translation. 

The  texts  we  have  reviewed  are  "new"  translations  of  Ronsard  which  I  have 
been  able  to  locate.  Two  others  can  be  shown  to  have  existed,  but  have  so  far 
eluded  me.  A  first,  a  translation  oi  L'Hydre  deffaict,  is  mentioned  by  McFar- 
lane,  but  he  refers  only  to  a  footnote  in  Laumonier's  Ronsard  poke  lyrique  where 
the  trail  ends,  since  no  source  is  cited  there  for  the  existence  of  the  transla- 
tion.^'^ However,  there  is  evidence  that  this  translation  existed,  and  it  is  the 
passage  in  Ronsard,  mentioned  earlier,  expressing  pride  in  Latin  and  Greek 
versions  of  the  poem.  The  obvious  place  to  look  for  these  translations  is  the 
collection  of  Greek,  Latin  and  French  poems  in  which  the  Hydre  itself  was  first 
published,  but  it  does  not  contain  them.'^ 

A  second  translation  of  Ronsard  which  undoubtedly  existed  is  Charles  Uten- 
hove's  version  of  Ronsard's  elegy  dedicated  to  Paul  de  Foix.  Evidence  that  it 
existed  is  threefold.  Firstly,  in  a  sonnet  in  his  Xenia  of  1568,  Utenhove  sug- 
gests the  immortality  of  Ronsard's  elegy  to  Foix  would  be  assured  by  Greek 
and  Latin  versions  (though,  conscious  no  doubt  of  Ronsard's  feelings,  he  has- 
tily added  that  Ronsard's  French  would  be  immortal  anyway).'^  Secondly, 
Ronsard  published  the  elegy  in  his  Elegies,  Mascarades  et  Bergerie  (1565),  a  book 
designed  to  improve  relations  between  France  and  England  (Foix  was  an  am- 
bassador in  England),  and  Utenhove,  who  lived  in  England,  undertook  a  sim- 
ilar assignment  in  his  Xenia  (1568):  nothing  is  more  plausible  than  that  Utenhove 
should  have  translated  Ronsard's  praise  of  the  ambassador  for  an  English  au- 
dience. ^^  Thirdly,  and  conclusively,  a  letter  from  Utenhove  to  Ronsard  says 
he  is  sending  him  a  translation  of  an  elegy  dedicated  to  Foix.  ^  It  is  very  cur- 
ious that  it  was  not  published  in  the  1568  Xenia. 

Among  the  reasons  why  so  many  contemporaries  translated  Ronsard,  two 
are  highly  significant.^^  One  is  that  the  content  of  Ronsard's  poems  was  very 
often  felt  to  be  sufficiently  important,  on  political  or  religious  grounds,  to  re- 
quire translation.  Indeed,  this  paper,  by  drawing  attention  to  many  new  trans- 
lations of  political  and  religious  works,  has  significantly  altered  McFarlane's 
profile  of  the  corpus  of  translations  —  especially  when  one  bears  in  mind  that 
many  of  the  new  translations  mentioned  here  are  of  very  long  poems.  And 
the  second  motivation  for  translations  is  the  fascination  with  the  poet's  own 
excellence,  the  desire  to  emulate  an  acknowledged  master,  the  feeling  that  trans- 
lation of  such  a  gifted  poet  could  only  extend  and  refine  one's  own  talents.  One 
of  the  translators  we  have  looked  at,  Scevole  de  Sainte-Marthe,  develops  this 
thought  in  a  poem  about  his  translations  of  Ronsard: 

Ad  Petrum  Ronsardum 

Aemula  dum  Latiis  Ronsardi  Gallica  nostri 
Conor  ego  in  Latios  vertere  scripta  modos, 


MALCOLM   C.    SMITH 


335 


Me  vis  maior  agit  solito,  ignotasque  per  aeres 

Abripit  hinc  tanti  spiritus  ille  viri. 
Quique  prius  proprio  cum  plectra  furore  moverem, 

Vix  bene  sum  notae  serpere  visus  humi, 
Summa  feror  super  astra:  iuvat  quoscunque  poetas 

Despicere,  &  sacri  pectinis  esse  patrem. 
Sic  olim  aetheriis  aquilae  dum  Regulus  alis 

Suscipitur,  reliquas  despicit  altus  aves.^^ 

Thus,  while  Latin  translations  contributed  powerfully  to  the  internationail  re- 
nown of  Ronsard,  they  did  no  less  for  the  renown  of  his  translators. 

Royal  Holloway  and  Bedford  New  College,  London 


Notes 


1.  See  Ronsard,  Oeuvres  completes,  ed.  P.  Laumonier,  L  Silver,  and  R.  Lebeque 
(S.T.F.M.),  20  vols.  (Paris,  1914-1975),  1:73  (cf.  77),  204;  2:99-100;  and  cf.  1:165, 
3:161  (references  to  Ronscird  here,  unless  otherwise  indicated,  are  to  this  edition),  and 
my  edition  of  his  Discours  des  miseres  (T.L.F.,  Geneve,  1979),  pp.  203-4,  note  to  line  1022. 

2.  Ronsard  17:22. 

3.  See  L  D.  McFarlane,  "Pierre  de  Ronsard  and  the  Neo-Latin  Poetry  of  His  Time," 
Res  Publica  Litterarum,  1  (1978):  192,  who  notes  a  contemporary  comment  on  a  trans- 
lation of  Ronsard  by  Antoine  de  Gouvea:  ".  .  .  in  qua  vel  Ronsardo  iudice  Gallicas  ele- 
gantias  salesque  non  aequavit  modo,  sed  superavit."  Coming  from  Ronsard,  that  is  praise 
indeed.  The  translation  is  titled  Antrum  Maedonium  ex  Gallico  Ronsardi  expressum. 

4.  McFarlane,  203-5;  see  also  P.  Bergman,  "Les  poesies  manuscrites  de  Francois 
et  Raphael  Thorius,"  Melanges  Paul  Thomas  (Bruges,  1930),  pp.  29-38. 

5.  The  pamphlet  (published  in  Paris  by  Andre  Wechel)  also  contains  a  poem  by 
Dorat  titled  Ad  Ronsardum  et  eius  Musas  ("Vestrum  erat,  6  Musae,  pacem  suadere,  nee 
arma  [.  .  .]."  The  copy  I  used  is  in  the  Bibliotheque  Nationale,  Paris  (Ye  494);  others 
are  mentioned  in  A.  Pereire's  "Bibliographic  des  oeuvres  de  Ronsard,"  Bulletin  du  Bib- 
liophile, nouv.  ser.  (1939),  18:211,  n.  3,  and  there  is  one  at  Harvard  University.  The 
translation  begins,  "Quod  dudum  optastis  contingere  tempus,  id  ultro  [.  .  .]."  For  the 
French  text,  see  Ronsard,  9:1-11  and  cf.  ix-x. 

6.  Copies  are  in  the  Bibliotheque  Nationale,  Paris  (Res.  Ye  1 136  and  Inv.  Yc.  1759) 
and  British  Library  (11474  h  27  [12]);  see  my  article,  "An  Early  Edition  of  a  Discours 
by  Ronsard,"  Bibliotheque  d'Humanisme  et  Renaissance,  28  (1966):  682-84. 

7.  The  book  was  published  in  Paris.  I  used  the  British  Library's  copy  (241  k  27  [1]). 
The  translation  of  Ronsard  is  at  lOl""*;  the  original  is  in  Ronsard,  10:80  (Second  livre 
des  meslanges,  1559).  The  translation  is  mentioned  by  Guillaume  Colletet:  see  his  Traitte 
de  I'epigramme  et  Traitte  du  sonnet,  ed.  P.  A.  Jannini  (Geneve  and  Paris,  1965),  pp.  237 
and  241-42  (the  page  reference  in  Sainte-Marthe  which  Jannini  gives  is  erroneous). 

8.  See  C.  Faisant,  "Un  des  aspects  de  la  reaction  humaniste  ^  la  fin  du  XVr  si^cle: 
la  paraphrase  latine  des  poetes  fran^ais,"  in  P.  Tuynman,  G.  C.  Kuiper  and  E.  Kess- 


336  LATIN  TRANSLATIONS  OF   RONSARD 


ler,  eds.,  Acta  Coventus  neo-Latini  Amstelodamensis  (Miinchen,  1979),  p.  365  and  notes 
19  and  20.  Faisant  does  not  give  the  date  of  publication  of  Sainte-Marthe's  Poetica  pa- 
raphrasis  (where,  he  notes,  the  Franciade  translations  are  at  37^°).  The  poem  which  pre- 
faced the  Franciade  translations  {In  versos  aliquot .  .  .),  and  of  which  he  cites  a  short  passage, 
is  the  one  published  in  collected  editions  of  Sainte-Marthe  with  the  title  Ad  Petrum  Ron- 
sardum  (see  note  23).  The  Franciade  translations  are  not  in  the  later  editions  of  Sainte- 
Marthe  that  I  have  consulted  (Les  oeuvres,  Paris,  1579,  B.L.  640  k  3  [2];  Poemata,  Au- 
gustoriti  Pictonum,  1596,  Bibliotheque  Nationale  Yc  1698;  Poemata  et  Elogia,  Augus- 
toriti  Pictonum,  1606,  B.L.  C  65  bbl5;  and  Opera  latina  et  gallica,  Lutetiae  Parisiorum, 
1633,  B.L.  C  108  e3). 

9.  See  Ronsard,  15:85;  18:489-90  and,  for  Sainte-Marthe's  admiration  for  Ronsard, 
P.  de  Nolhac,  Ronsard  et  I'humanisme  (Paris,  1966),  pp.  194-96  and  240-42. 

10.  He  points  this  out  when  introducing  the  first  translation,  and  in  a  manuscript 
not  at  the  beginning  of  the  British  Library's  copy.  On  Faye's  book  (Lutetiae,  1571 ,  B.L. 
C  46  c  7),  see  the  late  D.  P.  Walker's  excellent  book.  Unclean  Spirits:  Possession  and  Ex- 
orcism in  France  and  England  in  the  late  sixteenth  and  early  seventeenth  centuries  (London  1981), 
pp.  19-28.  It  was  Professor  Walker  who  drew  my  attention  to  Faye's  translations  of 
Ronsard.  They  are  found  respectively  on  pages  172-73  and  396  of  Faye's  book,  and 
they  are  of  lines  351-68  of  the  Continuation  and  185-90  of  the  Remonstrance  (pages  99-100 
and  114  respectively  in  my  edition  of  Ronsard's  Discours). 

1 1 .  The  publication  appeared  under  an  Edinburgh  imprint  and  in  two  parts.  I  used 
the  British  Library's  copy  (1059  all  [1]);  the  translation  of  Ronsard,  with  a  com- 
mentary on  the  supposed  meaning  of  the  passages,  is  in  t.I,  75-81.  The  tract  has  been 
attributed  to  F.  Hotman  and  H.  Daneau  jointly  (see  an  article  by  M.  Ishigami  in  Bul- 
letin de  la  Societe  des  amis  de  Montaigne,  1976)  and  to  N.  Barnaud  (see  Haag,  La  France 
protestante,  2^  ed.,  I,  844).  A  French  version  also  appeared  {Le  resveille-matin  des  Fra- 
ncois et  de  leurs  voisins,  compose  par  Eusebe  philadelphe  cosmopolite  en  forme  de  dialogues,  2t. 
[Edimbourg,  1574],  B.L.  1059  b  18  [1]);  it  contains  Ronsard's  original  French  (109-14). 

12.  The  passages  are  from  the  fourth  book  of  the  Franciade,  successively  lines  1557-68; 
1599-1626;  1633-50;  1324-68;  1379-82;  1423-32  and  1439-46  (all  in  vol.  16  of  Lau- 
monier^s  S.T.F.M.  edition).  On  the  interpretation  of  these  passages  as  satire  of  Charles 
IX  and  Catherine,  see  F.  Charbonnier,  La  Poesie  frangaise  et  les  guerres  de  religion  (1560- 
1574)  (Paris,  1920),  pp.  353-59;  K.  Cameron,  "Ronsard  and  Book  IV  of  the  Franciade,'' 
Bibliotheque  d'Humanisme  et  Renaissance,  32  (1970):  395-406;  and  N.  Cazauran,  "La  'tra- 
gique  peinture'  du  premier  dialogue  du  Reveille-matin"  in  Etudes  seiziemistes  offertes  a  V. 
L.  Saulnier  (Geneve,  1980):  336-38. 

13.  On  Ronsard's  allusiveness,  see  my  article,  "The  Hidden  Meaning  of  Ronsard's 
Hymne  de  VHyver, "  in  French  Renaissance  Studies  in  Honor  of  Isidore  Silver  (Lexington,  1974), 
pp.  85-97  and  studies  mentioned  there. 

14.  See  Historia  de  ortu,  progressu  et  ruina  haereseon  huius  saeculi,  2  t.  (Coloniae,  1614), 
B.L.  4571  b  10.  The  translations  of  Ronsard  are  as  folllows:  1:127,  a  translation  of 
Ronsard,  11:172;  2:197,  translation  of  Ronsard,  12:180,  lines  155-65  (ending  at  "Vi- 
vent  apres  leur  mort");  2:209,  translation  of  12:181,  lines  179-84;  2:378,  translation 
of  11:84,  lines  397-400;  2:380,  translation  of  11:23,  lines  79-80;  and  2:419-20,  trans- 
lation of  1 1 :  47-48,  lines  201-8.  The  original  passages  from  Ronsard's  Discours  are  found 
also  in  my  edition,  pages  208,  125,  66  and  90.  The  translations  of  Ronsard  were  doubt- 
less done  by  the  translator  of  the  whole  book,  whom  I  cannot  identify  (the  publisher, 
in  a  prefatory  note,  simply  says  "totum  hoc  opus  in  Latinam  linguam  [.  .  .]  ut  con- 
verteretur  atque  hac  forma  excuderetur  curavi").  The  undeserved  neglect  from  which 
Raemond  suffers  will  in  due  course  be  rectified  by  Lionel  Swain's  London  Ph.D.  thesis. 


MALCOLM   C.    SMITH  337 

15.  Manuscrits  latins,  8139, 12r°. 
i     16.  See  the  Prosopopee  defeu  Frangois  de  Lorreine  due  de  Guise  (13:299-300)  and  an  Ep- 
itaphe  de  Francois  de  Lorraine,  due  de  Guyse  (18:334-35). 

17.  See  McFarlane,  204,  footnote,  and  P.  Laumonier,  Ronsard poete  lyrique,  2^  ed. 
(Paris,  1923),  p.  243,  n.  3.  These  scholars  attribute  the  trzmslation  to  Dorat,  but  I  do 
not  know  on  what  evidence. 

18.  The  work  is  Paeanes  Sive  Hymni  in  triplieem  vietoriam,  felieitate  Caroli  IX.  Galliarum 
Regis  invietissimi,  et  Henrieifratris,  Ducis  Andegavensis  virtute  partam,  loanne  Aurato  et  aliis 
doctis  poetis  auctoribus  (Lutetiae,  1569),  Houghton  Library,  Harvard,  FC5.  D  7267. 
569  p. 

19.  See  his  Xenia,  seu  Ad  illustrium  aliquot  Europae  hominum  nomina,  Allusionum  liber  pri- 
mus (Basiliae  Rauracorum,  1568),  B.L.  11475  b  44,  p.  85. 

20.  On  the  diplomatic  role  of  the  Elegies,  Masearades  et  Bergerie,  see  my  "Ronsard  and 
Queen  Elizabeth  I,"  Bibliotheque  d'Humanisme  et  Renaissance,  29  (1967):  93-119. 

21.  See  Nolhac,  Ronsard  et  L'humanisme,  217-18.  The  relationship  between  Ronsard 
and  Utenhove  is  discussed  by  W.  Janssen  in  Charles  Utenhove,  sa  vie  et  son  oeuvre  (1536-1600) 
(Maastricht,  1939),  31-35,  but  although  he  declares  (32)  that  Ronsard  translated  the 
elegy  to  Foix  into  Latin,  he  gives  no  source  for  this,  and  none  of  the  manuscripts  he 
cites  in  his  bibliography  (75-79)  appears  to  contain  it.  Utenhove's  translation  of  part 
of  Ronsard's  Discours  a  Monseigneur  le  Due  de  Savoie  (9:157),  published  in  the  Xenia,  is 
in  McFarlane's  Hst. 

22.  Scholars  have  pointed  to  other  reasons  for  translating  Ronsard:  the  desire  to  make 
his  poetry  available  to  foreigners,  to  put  his  poetry  into  a  "durable"  language  and  help 
make  it  immortal,  the  feeling  that  Latin  was  a  more  appropriate  medium  for  serious 
subjects,  and  the  simple  desire  to  "show  off  (see  McFarlane,  "Pierre  de  Ronsard  .  .  .," 
197,  and  cf.  G.  Demerson,  Dorat  et  son  temps,  eulture  classique  et  presence  au  monde  [Paris, 
1983],  pp.  28-29). 

23.  Poemata,  Augustoriti  Pictonum  (1596),  B.Nat.  Yc  1698,  230. 


Le  "De  matriti  sordibus"  de 

Juan  de  Iriarte  (1702-1771)  et  les 

courants  d'idees  de  son  epoque 

Alan  Soons 
Le  genre  des  laudes  urbium. 

Dans  la  litterature  latine  les  poemes  a  la  louange  des  villes  sont  as- 
sez  nombreux,  des  celui  d'Ausone,  Ordo  urbium  nobilium,  du  IV^ 
siecle.  On  pourrait  signaler  la  Laudatio  Florentinae  urbis  de  Bruni, 
la  Cleopolis,  au  sujet  de  Paris,  de  Quintianus  Stoa,  et  VUrbis  Olisiponis  descrip- 
tion de  Damiao  de  Gois,  entre  une  foule  d'autres  a  la  Renaissance.  On  re- 
marque  d'habitude  dans  les  poemes  latins  de  ce  genre  (1)  un  recit  de  la 
fondation  de  la  ville,  dans  un  cadre  geographique  et,  au  besoin,  mythologique; 
(2)  une  caracterisation  de  ses  habitants,  et  de  leurs  activites;  (3)  une  descrip- 
tion de  ce  qui  survit,  ruines  ou  monuments,  de  I'antiquite;  et  (4)  une  eloge 
des  ses  institutions  et  de  son  prince.  Au  cours  du  XVP  siecle  on  devine  un 
nouveau  courant:  de  temps  a  autre  on  trouve  le  parallele  etabli  entre  la  vie 
de  la  cite  et  celle  de  I'etre  humain:  essor,  prosperite,  declin,  et  enfm  mort. 
Ce  genre  de  poeme  se  trouve  dans  I'antiquite  tardive  deja  associe  au  theme 
de  la  louange  des  monarchies.  Le  De  aedificiis  de  Procope  vante  ainsi  les  oeu- 
vres  imperiales,  tandis  que  la  Laus  Stilichonis  de  Claudien  insiste  sur  la  cite 
de  Rome  comme  symbole  du  principat,  ayant  son  lieu  privilegie  dans  la  civi- 
lisation. On  pouvait  alors  chercher  encore  Rome  a  Rome.  On  decouvre  chez 
les  hymnodes  Chretiens  une  nouvelle  preoccupation,  celle  des  sepultures  des 
martyrs,  et  leurs  reliques  comme  ornement  nonpareil  d'une  ville  antique. 

Le  genre,  semble-t-il,  n'a  neanmoins  jamais  ete  transpose  comme  les  au- 
tres  dans  les  Argumenta  ludicra  de  la  Renaissance  et  du  XVIP  siecle.  Les 
poemes,  tels  ceux  de  Stigliani,  de  Blainville  et  de  Waleff  qui  nous  occuperont 
plus  tard,  et  qui  entrent  sous  ce  signe,  sont  toujours  en  langue  moderne.  De 
la  peut-etre  qu'on  doive  classer  le  poeme  qui  nous  interesse,  le  De  Matriti 
sordibus  d'Iriarte,  provisionnellement  comme  une  longue  digression  prenant  sa 
racine  dans  quelque  hypothetique  encomium  Matriti  tronque,  d'argument  es- 
sentiellement  serieux. 


340  *  JUAN   DE  IRIARTE  ET   LES  COURANTS  d'iDEES 

L'auteur  Juan  de  Iriarte. 

Notre  poete  est  ne  a  Puerto  de  la  Cruz  de  Orotava,  dans  I'lle  de  Tenerife, 
en  1702.  Tres  jeune  il  arrive  a  Paris  pour  faire  ses  etudes  au  College  de  Cler- 
mont, ensuite  a  celui  du  Cardinal  Lemoine  et  celui  de  Louis-le-Grand  au  temps 
qu'y  enseignait  le  Pere  Poree,  II  etudie  sa  rhetorique  a  la  Sante,  puis  apres 
une  courte  visite  a  Londres  il  arrive  a  Madrid,  ou  il  commence  a  faire  partie 
du  personnel  de  la  nouvelle  Bibliotheque  Royale,  fondee  en  1712.  II  suit  en 
meme  temps  la  carriere  d'instituteur  de  latin  et  de  rhetorique  dans  les  mai- 
sons  ducales  de  Bejar  et  d'Alba.  On  se  souvient  qu'il  aura  invente  une  espece 
de  jeu  de  damier,  avec  quelque  deux  cents  cases,  pour  mieux  enseigner  le  latin 
aux  jeunes  nobles  (et  pari  passu  les  preceptes  de  la  morale).  En  1732  il  devient 
bibliothecaire,  un  poste  qu'il  detient  jusqu'a  sa  mort  en  1771. 

Entre  ses  oeuvres  sont  dignes  de  mention  ses  nombreux  epigrammes  en  latin, 
divises  entre  religieux  et  autres;  des  poemes  plus  ambitieux,  toujours  en  latin, 
sur  les  mecenats  de  Ferdinand  VI  et  son  frere  Charles  III;  sur  un  monument 
qui  honore  la  defense  de  La  Havane  contre  les  Anglais;  sur  la  tauromachie 
et  aussi  sur  un  celebre  torero  de  I'epoque;  et  enfin  notre  poeme,  signale  dans 
I'edition  posthume  de  ses  pieces  fugitives  comme  "un  long  fragment  de  poeme, 
ecrit  avec  beaucoup  de  grace  et  de  bienseance,  qui  peint  I'ancienne  malpro- 
prete  qu'on  a  vue  durant  ce  regne  [c'est-a-dire  celui  de  Charles  III]  dispa- 
raitre  des  rues  de  Madrid."  II  s'agit  d'une  oeuvre  de  234  hexametres. 


Ce  que  dit  le  poeme. 

L'invocation  est  dirigee,  comme  il  est  juste,  a  Apollon,  Musagete  mais  aussi 
dieu  medecin  qui  preside  les  lustrations  des  villes  poUuees: 

Tua  numina  supplex 
posco,  pater  Vatum,  medicae  pater  artis  Apollo. 
Coelesti  medicata  manu  concede  benignus 
balsama,  vitali  quorum  munitus  odore, 
per  medias  impune  ferar  tota  urbe  mephites.  (40-44) 

Madrid,  I'Espagne  a  eu  sa  renommee  et  ses  heros, 

.  .  .  regnatricem  orbis,  pompae  regalis  alumnam, 

vestibulum  coeli  centeno  Hispanica  hiatu 

Fama  crepat.  Tenet  Hesperias  haec  credula  mentes 

relligio,  quam,  pro  patriis  ceu  militet  aris, 

fortiter  arrepta  defendat  quisque  machaera.  (46-50) 

Mais  voici  qu'un  novus  hospes  (53)  se  voit  oblige  a  patauger  par  les  rues  de 
la  capitale  entre  la  pourriture  et  des  meutes  de  chiens  feroces.  Cela  provoque 


ALAN   SOONS  34I 

la  risee  de  la  sordidula  plebs  (66),  les  seuls  etres  humains  qui  apparaissent,  et 
encore  a  peine,  lies  par  une  epithete  au  titre  du  poeme,  dans  le  fragment. 
De  tous  les  cotes  il  n'y  a  qu'ordure,  et  il  est  bien  difficile  de  trouver  au  dessous 
la  terre  ferme.  On  est  oblige  de  se  hausser  de  souliers  ridicules,  camelinus  co- 
thurnus (83)  pour  se  proteger.  Voici  des  immondices  de  toutes  les  couleurs, 
impossibles  a  decrire: 

Ipse  horret  calamus,  calamo  niger  obstupet  humor 
pendulus,  et  iussas  tenuit  perarare  figuras, 
non  satis  obscuro  metuens  rem  pingere  visu. 
O  mihi  si  calamum  detur  Stygialibus  undis 
tingere!  (125-129) 

Seule  revocation  des  terreurs  de  I'ancienne  mythologie  — I'Averne,  I'Orcus,  le 
Oocyte,  I'Erebe,  les  Furies  — en  saurait  communiquer  une  vague  idee 
(153-158).  Des  betes  mortes  flottent  dans  les  ruisseaux,  et  Madrid  est  possede 
par  la  putrefaction  et  les  vautours: 

Ac  velut  atrocis  cum  post  discrimina  pugnae 
densa  per  informes  iacuere  cadavera  campos, 
tabidaque  impuro  late  contagia  caelo, 
morte  procul  spirante,  fluunt,  simul  aethere  toto 
vulturiorum  agmen  glomeratur,  et  impete  facto, 
unguibus  exertis,  inhiantibus  undique  rostris 
ocius  in  putres,  dulcissima  pabula,  praedas 
involat,  .  .  .  (183-190) 

Les  chiens  et  les  chats  rongent  des  charognes,  boivent  des  liquides  horrifiants 
Meme  les  os  des  morts  sont  exhumes  pour  leurs  repas: 

Parte  alia  aggreditur,  stomacho  latrante  coactus 
(visa  loquor)  canis  ipse  canem,  scapulamve  parentis, 
vel  turpi  effossam  tumulo,  ac  putredine  adesam 
rodit  avi  calvam.  Spretis  pars  carnibus,  atrum 
lambere  pulmentum,  liquidaeque  coagula  sordis;  .... 
(201-205) 

A  I'interieur  des  murailles  paissent  en  maitres  les  pourceaux,  qui  font  reson- 
ner  rues  et  places  de  leurs  cris.  L'Orcus  eut  ses  monstres;  Madrid  a  ses  betes 
aux  soies  de  sanglier  (220-225). 


Les  affinites  avec  les  genres  satiriques. 

Le  genre  satirique  qui  offre  beaucoup  de  ressemblance  avec  I'esprit  et  la  let- 
tre  de  ce  poeme  est  celui  qui  evoque  un  Monde  Ren  verse.  On  se  souvient, 
par  exemple,  des  descriptions  que  nous  rencontrons  dsins  Tite-Live  et  Plutarque 


342  JUAN   DE  IRIARTE   ET   LES  COURANTS   d'iDEES 

de  la  fondation  de  Rome:  au  centre  meme  de  la  ville  future,  a  la  Roma 
Quadrata,  Romulus  fait  une  excavation,  y  assassine  Remus  (selon  Plutarque) 
ou  y  ensevelit  un  boeuf  voue  a  Hercule  (selon  Tite-Live)  et  declare  I'endroit 
desormais  mundus.  Iriarte,  lui,  nous  presente  quelque  chose  comme  I'epi- 
sode  a  Ten  vers:  Vimmunditia  defait  a  son  tour  la  fondation  d'une  ville;  les 
restes  des  animaux  et  des  aieux  morts  sont  ici  deterres,  et  .  .  .  les  pores 
font  les  superbes  sur  les  places  publiques  dediees  naguere  a  la  gloire  des 
rois  et  des  heros. 

Comme  dans  les  textes  de  I'Horace  satirique  on  suit  la  trace  du  vir  bonus  dans 
ses  infortunes.  Voici  une  autre  fois  un  ingenu  moque  par  lui-meme,  avec 
ses  chaussures  grotesquement  renforcees  contre  I'immonde  maree.  On  re- 
trouve,  qui  plus  est,  quelques  caracteristiques  de  la  satire  de  tous  les  temps: 
I'ordure  meme,  cet  epitome  de  I'abjection  de  I'humanite,  et  aussi  la  succes- 
sion de  scenes  ou  les  objets  saisissent  pele-mele  I'attention  du  poete.  Le  sa- 
tirique cependant  ne  blame  personne.  Qui  est  done  a  Madrid  I'ennemi  du 
civisme  et  de  la  sociabilite?  Faute  de  la  presence  et  de  I'agencement  dans  ce 
fragment  des  etres  humains  ce  doit  etre  une  force  plutot  metaphysique,  voire 
la  negativite  en  action. 


Les  precurseurs  Stigliani,  Blainville  et  Waleff. 

On  aurait  pu  lire  I'eloge  des  incomparables  immondices  des  rues  de  Ma- 
drid dans  au  moins  trois  poemes  en  langue  moderne  pendant  les  cent  vingt 
annees  qui  ont  precede,  a  savoir  La  Merdeide.  Stanze  in  lode  dei  stronzi  della 
Real  Villa  di  Madrid,  de  Tommaso  Stigliani,  Madrid  ridicule,  poeme  burlesque,  d'un 
certain  de  Blainville,  secretaire  d'ambassade,  et  Les  Rues  de  Madrid  de  Blaise- 
Henri  de  Corte,  baron  de  Waleff,  Liegeois  et  gouverneur  militaire  de  Valence. 

L'oeuvre  de  Stigliani  (vers  1642)  contient  216  vers,  en  huitains,  c'est-a-dire 
avec  une  versification  "noble."  Cet  Italien  invoque  d'abord  les  Muses,  en  ci- 
tant  ses  devanciers  qui  ont,  eux  aussi,  chante  les  choses  immondes:  mouches, 
puces,  voire  les  maladies  veneriennes.  Voici  dans  son  poeme  un  Madrid  vi- 
vace, entasse  de  monde,  tous  obeissant  a  leurs  necessites  physiques  dans 
les  rues  memes,  parmi  lesquels  de  braves  chevaliers,  le  menu  peuple,  et  jus- 
qu'aux  modestes  femmes.  Tout  cela  rappelle  au  poete  les  ages  primitifs: 

.  .  .  felice  eta,  ma  pur  fetente  ell'era 
in  serbar  uso  cosi  sporco  e  immondo, 
ma  se  all'hor  si  habitavano  le  selve 
huomini  non  sembravano,  ma  belve. 

Pour  ses  descriptions  Stigliani  favorise  les  metaphores  militaires,  les  lignes  de 
bataille,  les  places  d'armes,  etc.,  mais  aussi  les  figures  de  la  geometrie,  geome- 


ALAN   SOONS  343 

trie  plane  et  geometric  solide.  Une  tache  surhumaine  attend  un  Alcide  de 
nos  jours: 

.  .  .  ma  se  spoglia  terrena  anco  vestisse, 

non  havria  forze  a  si  gran  caso  uguali; 

merde  sgombrar  in  un  terren  si  fisse 

opra  non  e  da  huomini  mortali. 

Mostri  piu  fieri  son  di  Afri  o  di  Mauri, 

e  vincon  I'ldre,  i  Cerberi  e  i  Centauri.  (p.  47) 

Stigliani  clot  son  poemc  avec  une  suggestion:  que  cette  capitale,  Villa  real, 
fregio  e  decoro  I  delVIhero  terren,  donna  del  mondo  (p.  48)  change  quelques  lettres 
de  son  nom: 

.  .  .  che  piu  sonoro 

sara  il  tuo  vanto  fetido  e  immondo; 

e  di,  pei  stronzi  si  famosi  e  belli: 

"Merdid  ognun,  non  piu  Madrid,  mi  appelli." 

Un  autre  poemc  spirituel  est  celui  de  Blainvillc  (1713),  dont  Ics  dizains  con- 
sacres  aux  ordures  ne  constituent  qu'un  fragment.  Sa  quatrieme  stance  le 
revele  en  verve:  une  description  des  embarras  qui  afQigent  le  pieton  de  Ma- 
drid: 

Dans  cet  abyme  d'immondices 

il  faut  marcher  avec  compas, 

et  s'assurer  de  chaque  pas 

sur  la  foi  d'un  caillou  qui  glisse. 

.  .  .  et  toujours  le  moindre  malheur 

est  un  pied  de  vilaine  ordure 

d'une  effroyable  puanteur. 

La  quarantieme  stance  procure  au  poete  une  petite  aventure,  lorsqu'une  duegna 
lui  verse  des  ordures  sur  la  tete  avec  un  agua-va!  Le  mzilheureux  promeneur 
doit  chercher  son  logis  dans  ce  pietre  etat,  et  personne  ne  veut  le  recevoir 
ainsi  embourbe.  Et  Blainvillc  de  conclure  avec  son  invocation  de  la  ville  et 
une  allusion  aux  monarques  peut-etre  responsables  de  tout  cela: 

Madrid,  cloaque  d'immondices! 

Sejour  detestable  et  puant! 

Dont  plus  d'un  prince  chathuant 

faisait  autrefois  ses  delices. 

.  .  .  On  ne  hume  chez  toi  que  merde  ou  que  poussiere. 

Puisqu'il  faut  avoir  sous  le  nez 

a  tout  moment  la  tabatiere, 

pour  n'etre  pas  empoisonne.  (XL VI) 


344  *  JUAN   DE  IRIARTE   ET  LES  COURANTS  d'iDEES 

L'oeuvre  de  Waleff  est  franchement  plus  didactique,  prefigurant  deja  (1732) 
les  Lumieres.  Les  rues  de  Madrid  comportent  six  chants,  en  dizains.  On  saisit 
le  ton  du  nouveau  siecle,  comme  chez  Iriarte,  dans  une  reference  a  une  im- 
pitoyable  canaille^'^  infest2int  les  rues.  L'interet  de  Waleff  se  porte  cependant 
vers  le  manque  de  salubrite,  I'infection: 

....  Fair  qu'ici-bas  vous  respirez 

II  s'en  forme  certains  atomes 

precurseurs,  fideles  symptomes 

des  accidens  que  vous  souffrez. 

.  .  .  Doutez-vous  que  Fair  sans  relache 

par  son  mouvement  n'en  detache 

les  atomes  les  plus  nitreux, 

que  bientot  par  la  meme  voye 

cet  air  subtil  ne  vous  renvoye 

ces  corpuscules  dangereux?  (Ill,  ix-x) 

Ces  atomes,  par  les  coups  infaillibles  I  de  leurs  pointes  imperceptibles  entrainent  (III, 
xi)  la  paralysie,  I'apoplexie,  les  coliques,  la  paleur  et  la  langueur.  Mais  de  Wa- 
leff sombre  bientot  dans  le  desespoir  apres  son  vain  essai  de  science  (III,  xvi). 
Cette  negligence  est  aussi  vieille  que  I'Espagne,  et  notre  poete  imagine  les  ha- 
bitants de  la  Peninsule  a  la  lointaine  epoque  d'Iber,  petit-fils  de  Noe: 

Cu  masculin  et  cu  femelle, 

aussi  hardis  que  cus  d'oisons, 

se  vuidaient  souvent  pele-mele 

par  les  fenetres  des  maisons;  ....  (VI,  xvi) 

On  remarque  dans  ces  poemes,  sauf  peut-etre  dans  le  plus  abstrait  celui  de 
Waleff,  la  presence  de  la  figure  humaine,  d'un  tourbillon  d'activite.  On  y  ren- 
contre bien  sur  les  memes  Matriti  sordes^  mais  Iriarte  insistera  sur  la  notion 
archai'que  de  pollution  que  le  seul  AppoUon  saurait  soigner;  sur  I'absence  de 
toute  sociabilite  autour  de  son  malheureux  pieton;  sur  le  parallele  entre  Ma- 
drid et  I'effroyable  Orcus;  sur  les  ossements  profanes  par  les  betes,  et  sur  le 
va-et-vient  des  troupeaux  de  cochons.  Ces  elements  nouveaux  pourront  nous 
fournir  des  points  d'appui  pour  entreprendre  un  jugement  de  ce  poeme  peut- 
etre  revelateur  de  la  pensee  d'une  epoque  plus  avancee,  celle  du  seuil  des 
Lumieres. 


Le  my  the  de  la  cite  polluee. 

Le  personnage  de  Tite-Live  avait  salue  sa  Cite  comme  ne  possedant  aucun 
endroit  qui  ne  fut  empreint  du  sacre  et  rempli  de  divinites.  Dans  les  vers 
d'Iriarte,  cependant,  Madrid,  elle  aussi  ville-mere  d'un  Empire,  est  un  nouvel 


ALAN   SOONS  345 

Orcus,  voire  une  espece  de  Babylone  de  I'Apocalypse.  On  remarque  une  coin- 
cidence avec  I'homiletique  de  Toconius  et  d'Augustin,  qui  traduisent,  eux,  toute 
immondice  de  la  Cite  d'ici-bas  en  des  termes  moraux:  la  boue  et  I'obscurite 
des  rues  symbolisent  le  vice  oil  patauge  I'humanite.  II  y  a  un  decalage  en 
ce  qu'Iriarte  refuse  d'avancer  des  reproches  specifiques.  Les  rues  madrilenes 
avec  leur  dorure  molle  et  indescriptible  ne  rappellent  nuUement  les  chaussees 
en  or  et  en  jaspe  de  la  Cite  des  Bienheureux  de  Saint-Jean,  et  ces  eaux  visqueu- 
ses  en  rien  celles  a  la  surface  de  cristal. 

Iriarte,  comme  nous  I'avons  deja  signale  dans  I'analyse  de  son  poeme,  in- 
voque  les  pouvoirs  d'ApoUon,  dieu  de  la  medecine  et  de  I'harmonie,  et  aussi 
celui  qui  preside  aux  dissipations  du  miasma,  aux  purifications  de  la  ville  an- 
tique. C'est  en  meme  temps  bien  lui  qui  accable  les  villes  de  pestes  et  de  mal- 
heurs  lorsque  les  honneurs  dus  a  un  heros  ont  ete  negliges  par  les  citoyens, 
circonstance  rappelee  peut-etre  (48-50,  deja  cite)  par  notre  poete. 

Nous  ne  rencontrons  aucun  mot  sur  un  Madrid  possible,  mais  le  De  Matriti 
sordibus  se  range  neanmoins  parmi  les  ecrits  utopiques  de  son  siecle.  Pour 
etablir  la  portee  de  ceux-ci  prenons  le  paradigme  de  Roger  Mucchielli.  D'a- 
bord  il  y  a  revoke  individuelle,  non  egoiste  mais  humaine,  devant  le  desor- 
dre  et  la  barbaric  de  I'epoque,  sans  participation  a  aucun  mouvement  coUectif, 
soit  une  espece  d'effervescence  indignee.  Comme  deuxieme  etape  il  y  a  une 
observation  lucide  et  methodique  de  la  societe  contemporaine  de  I'auteur, 
consideree  comme  un  cas  pathologique.  En  troisieme  lieu  surgit  le  pessi- 
misme  au  sujet  des  possibilites  d'intervention  efficace,  ne  d'un  sentiment  d'im- 
puissance,  d'une  impression  de  solitude  desesperee  et  menacee.  Au  quatrieme 
temps,  — ici  Iriarte  s'arrete  — il  y  a  une  contradiction  intolerable  entre  (1)  la 
revoke  individuelle  et  (2)  I'observation  lucide.  Manque  dans  ce  poeme  ina- 
cheve  le  reste  du  discours  utopique,  c'est-a-dire  la  construction  imaginaire. 

Par  digression,  mais  toujours  avec  reference  a  la  pollution  de  la  ville  et 
a  I'aporie  d'Iriarte  au  terme  de  son  poeme,  on  pourrait  etablir  une  hypothese 
en  se  reportant  aux  ecrits  theoriques  de  Gaston  Bachelard  sur  la  reverie.  Selon 
ce  penseur,  la  conscience  reveuse,  a  la  rencontre  de  la  pate,  de  la  fange,  s'a- 
pergoit  que  "la  forme  est  evincee,  effacee,  dissoute,  .  .  .  elle  [la  fange]  debar- 
rasse  notre  intuition  du  sens  des  formes.  .  .  .  [C'est]  une  experience  premiere 
de  la  matiere."  Cette  viscosite  traduit  "la  trace  d'une  fatigue  onirique."  II  s'en- 
suit  que  notre  novus  hospes,  et  son  createur,  "vivent  un  reve  gluant,"  signifiant 
a  son  tour  "une  lutte  ou  une  defaite  pour  creer,  pour  former." 


Les  idees:  physiologic  et  pathologie. 

C'est  sans  doute  une  notion  bien  anterieure  au  passage  bien  connu  de  la 
Republique  que  la  ville  a  une  existence  parallele  a  celle  de  I'etre  humain:  la 
justice  dans  la  cite  annonce  celle  qui  demeure  dans  les  coeurs.  Partant  de  cette 


346  '  JUAN   DE  IRIARTE   ET  LES  COURANTS   d'iDEES 

idee,  qui  tend  a  surgir  dans  toutes  les  epoques,  les  vers  d'Iriarte  peuvent  bien 
etre  examines  du  point  de  vue  des  conceptions  courantes  des  le  debut  du 
XVIP  siecle,  specifiquement  celles  qui  visent  la  physiologic  et  la  pathoge- 
nese. 

Tout  comme  le  corps  de  rhomme,  celui  de  la  ville  a  son  tissu.  Aristote  avait 
deja  travaille  avec  cette  metaphore  pour  imaginer  la  formation  de  I'etre  vi- 
vant,  I'epigenisme  et  la  croissance.  Dans  une  epoque  plus  proche  de  celle  que 
nous  etudions  Maupertuis  et  Haller,  eux,  avaient  fait  appel  aux  notions  d'ir- 
ritabilite  et  de  sensibilite  pour  etablir  I'origine  des  changements  observes  dans 
la  matiere  vivante.  Dans  ces  termes,  s'il  fallait  caracteriser  de  somatique  la 
ville  telle  qu'Iriarte  nous  la  propose,  on  dirait  que  la  physiologic  en  est  quasi- 
ment  arretee,  que  la  necrose  la  menace,  que  c'est  du  tissu  moribond  dans 
un  corps  qui  ne  possede  desormais  qu'une  frele  ame  vegetative,  ayant  deja 
perdu  la  sensitive  et  rintellective. 

Iriarte  ne  souffle  mot  au  sujet  des  dangers  de  la  peste,  dont  on  aurait  de 
nos  jours  grand'peur.  Ce  qui  est  remarquable  d'ailleurs  est  que  la  notion  d'in- 
fection  etait  alors  assez  mal  comprise.  On  reconnaissait  la  theorie  de  Fracastoro 
des  seminaria,  des  corpuscules  qui  se  communiquaient  d'un  corps  a  un  autre, 
et  aussi  celle  de  Sydenham,  qui  avait  soutenu  qu'il  y  aurait  de  petits  corps  veni- 
meux  d'origine  souterraine  inconnue  qui  repandaient  les  maladies.  La  sepsis 
etait  reconnue,  mais  toujours  comme  une  espece  de  souillure  due  aux  effets 
de  la  putrefaction  des  corps  organiques,  mais  la  science  de  la  pathogenese 
attendait  encore  la  decouverte  des  bacteries.  Les  exhalaisons  produisaient  la 
nausee  et  c'etait  presque  tout,  comme  nous  indique,  par  exemple,  Waleff: 
"Mais  de  I'ordure  virulente  /  I'infection  qui  vous  enchante  /  repugne  toujours 
aux  humains."  (II,  xv).  Bref,  une  confusion  de  I'hygiene  avec  I'esthetique,  et 
les  parfums  avec  les  antiseptiques,  jusqu'au  XIX^  siecle.  La  contagion  comme 
source  d'epidemie  etait  bien  reconnue  — de  la  les  ordonnances  medievales 
contre  les  cochons  en  ville  — mais  on  ne  se  hatait  pas  encore  pour  se  debar- 
rasser  des  substances  genantes.  On  a  meme  suggere  que  les  hommes  des  Lu- 
mieres  se  mefiaient  de  I'opposition  binaire  souillure/purete,  comme  ayant  sa 
source  dans  la  theologie  morale,  la  superstition.  Dans  I'oeuvre  d'Hoffmann 
(1721)  sur  les  maladies  qui  faisait  autorite  il  n'y  a  presque  rien  sur  la  proprete 
du  corps. 

Le  principe  hippocratique  de  katharsis,  etait  bien  entendu,  toujours  vivant 
mais  surtout  quand  il  s'appliquait  aux  villes  capitales.  On  etait  persuade  que 
les  villes  construites  face  a  I'Est  et  au  Sud  —  c'est  le  cas  de  Madrid  —  devaient 
avoir  une  abondance  relative  de  maux  dus  a  un  exces  de  phlegme:  les  flu- 
xions, les  diarrhees,  les  dysenteries.  On  decouvre  avant  tout  une  crainte  de 
perdre  trop  d'humeur  moite,  tout  comme  dans  le  corps  humain,  et  il  y  avait 
done  des  enthousiastes  des  exhalaisons  issues  des  immondices  en  plein  air. 
Celles-ci  avaient  leur  utilite  sur  place,  dans  les  rues,  et  servaient  a  impregner 
les  airs  trop  "subtils"  d'une  capitale  situee  a  la  hauteur  de  Madrid.  C'etait 


ALAN   SOONS  347 

d'ailleurs  un  axiome  pour  les  Madrilenes,  selon  le  maitre  a  penser  de  I'epoque, 
Benito  Jeronimo  Feijoo,  que  les  ordures  fetides  dans  les  lieux  peuples  "suf- 
foquent,  attrapent  et  boivent"  les  puanteurs  emanant  des  cadavres  enterres  — 
theorie  contrecarree  a  juste  titre  par  I'homme  relativement  eclaire  qu'etait 
Feijoo.  On  a,  sur  un  ton  plus  facetieux,  le  recit  rapporte  par  I'ambassadeur 
danois  Gleichen,  de  I'Espagnol  moribond  et  loin  de  sa  patrie  mais  recouvrant 
la  bonne  sante  des  qu'on  eut  mis  sous  son  lit  un  "bassin  d'air  de  Madrid," 
et  cela  apres  avoir  eu  des  reves  delicieux. 

Mais  tout  cela,  c'est  de  la  superstition.  Ecoutons  de  preference  le  discours 
theorique  des  Lumieres  chez  le  meme  Friedrich  Hoffman  (Fundamenta  me- 
dicinae  rationalis  systematicae ,  1739),  dans  son  chapitre  sur  les  secretions  et  les 
excretions:  "L'integrite  de  tout  le  corps,  ainsi  que  de  toutes  les  operations 
qui  se  font  dans  I'univers,  depend  principalement  de  la  synerese  et  de  la 
dierese,  ou  de  la  separation  et  de  la  conjonction  des  diferentes  parties."  L'eli- 
mination  des  parties  nuisibles  serait  done  essentielle  pour  la  recuperation  de 
la  sante.  Si  on  voulait  admettre  le  tres  ancien  parallele,  datant  au  moins  de 
Philon  d'Alexandrie,  entre  le  corps  humain  et  le  grand  univers,  on  pourrait 
dire  que  notre  poete  decrit  un  moment  d'arret  au  stage  de  la  synerese,  sans 
dierese  possible.  Ce  corps,  a  mi-distance  de  I'etre  humain  et  de  I'univers, 
qui  est  Madrid  se  trouve  encombre  de  ses  excrements. 

Ou  bien  ecoutons  la  theorie  de  la  sante  de  Van  Helmont,  selon  laquelle 
les  forces  a  I'interieur  de  I'homme  produisent  d'elles-memes  ce  mouvement 
qu'on  appelle  "coction,"  un  processus  qu'on  a  caracterise  comme  "une  sorte 
de  maturation  qui  corrige  le  vice  de  nos  humeurs  ou  qui  leur  donne  les  qua- 
lites  requises  pour  etre  evacuees  lorsqu'elles  sont  trop  degenerees  pour  etre 
encore  susceptibles  d'assimilation.  .  .  .  Dans  les  fievres  putrides  et  inflam- 
matoires  il  faut  aider  la  coction,  faire  que  se  relachent  les  solides  ou  leur  don- 
ner  du  ressort  s'ils  en  manquent,  afm  que  les  voies  soient  plus  libres  pour  faciliter 
I'evacuation."  Notre  pauvre  Madrid  reste  done  a  jamais  fievreux  et  moribond. 


Les  idees:  la  sociabilite  perdue. 

Comme  nous  avons  deja  remarque  au  sujet  des  genres  satiriques,  c'est  un 
axiome  que  ce  qui  est  brutalement  physique  — et  a  fortiori  ce  qui  est  productif 
de  la  nausee  — deplace  ce  qui  est  spirituel.  Mais  au  dedans  des  ecrits  de  ces 
genres-la  on  a  toujours  vu  la  persona  du  satirique  se  mouvoir  comme  un  veri- 
table etranger  parmi  d'autres  etres,  parmi  les  membres  de  quelque  societe. 
Gette  persona,  cette  voix  perdue  dans  le  poeme,  cherche  presque  toujours  sans 
espoir  la  Sociabilite. 

Jusqu'au  XVIP  siecle,  ou  Descartes  — suivant  entre  autres  Dion  de  Pruse 
dans  I'antiquite  —  voyait  dans  les  villes  une  expression  de  "la  volonte  de  quel- 


348  •  JUAN   DE  IRIARTE  ET  LES  COURANTS   d'iDEES 

ques  hommes  doues  de  raison,"  et  ou  Sorbiere  celebrait  un  Paris  ou  tout 
etait  bigearrerie  et  temerite  de  mouvemens ,  les  grandes  capitales  furent  de  hauts 
lieux  de  cette  sociabilite.  Mais  un  changement  s'est  produit,  vers  1675  disait- 
on,  dans  le  cas  de  Paris,  qui  s'apparente  a  une  fm  d'un  monde  enchante.  La 
pensee  du  XVIIP  siecle  tend  ensuite  vers  I'hostilite  envers  la  grande  ville, 
avant  tout  cette  pensee  qui  est  issue  de  la  tradition  religieuse.  II  y  a  toujours 
dans  les  meilleurs  cas  le  meme  heureux  commerce  des  hommes,  mais  on  en- 
tend  de  plus  en  plus  la  deploration  d'une  sociabilite  honteuse. 

La  ville  contaminee  d'Iriarte  represente  precisement  cette  perte  de  la  vie 
en  societe.  Les  ordures,  tout  comme  la  peste  de  Defoe  — ou  le  brouillard  brun 
d'Eliot  — ont  cree  autour  du  novus  hospes  une  ambiance  de  solitude.  L'atten- 
tion  qu'il  lui  faut  porter  a  chaque  pas  au  pave,  aux  animaux  menagants,  sou- 
ligne  I'absence  de  reseau  de  communication,  de  conversation,  de  fete.  Ce 
Madrid  a  reduit  en  atomes,  en  monades,  le  genre  humain. 

Le  marquis  de  la  Villa  de  San  Andres,  ce  compatriote  canarien  de  notre 
auteur,  ironisait  a  la  meme  epoque  sur  la  seule  fete  possible  face  a  la  "maree 
de  Madrid."  Les  dames  de  societe  servent  du  chocolat  a  leurs  invites  pen- 
dant que  tout  le  monde  observe  le  progres  du  nettoyage  infame  qui  se  deroule 
en  bas.  Sous  les  fenetres  des  gens  de  haut  ton  des  hommes  montes  sur  des 
planches  traversent  la  surface  de  I'immense  voirie  qu'est  la  rue:  voila  "une  fete 
odorifere  et  divertissante  pour  tous  les  sens." 

Toute  sociabilite  se  voit  etayee,  c'est  un  lieu  commun,  d'une  base  econo- 
mique  et  alimentaire.  II  est  assez  etonnant  qu'on  apprenne,  selon  I'analyse  de 
la  statistique  commerciale  du  XVIIP  siecle,  que  Madrid  etait  devenu  le  foyer 
unique  du  commerce  des  produits  agricoles  par  rapport  au  reste  de  la  Penin- 
sule.  Qui  plus  est,  on  a  calcule  que  les  aliments,  les  boissons  et  les  combusti- 
bles destines  a  la  seule  capitale  constituaient  vers  la  fin  du  regne  de  Charles 
III  la  cinquieme  partie  en  valeur  de  tout  le  commerce  espagnol,  y  compris 
I'americain.  Autrement  dit,  tout  le  produit  d'une  civilisation  a  inutilement 
abouti,  evacue  sur  la  surface  des  rues  solitaires  de  cette  ville,  et  dispute  par 
des  chiens  fameliques. 


Enfin  Sabatini  vint. 

Depuis  le  lointain  regne  des  Rois  Catholiques,  meme  avant  la  transfor- 
mation de  Madrid  en  capitale,  on  avait  vu  et  entendu  une  succession  de  decrets 
ayant  pour  objet  I'amelioration  de  I'hygiene  des  rues.  On  avait  cru  bannis  a 
jamais  par  un  Edit  de  1496  les  cochons  rodeurs,  mais  en  1613  un  Decret 
General  avait  du  repeter  les  menaces  contre  les  proprietaires  de  ceux-ci, 
et  en  meme  temps  defendre  le  lancement  des  ordures  par  les  fenetres.  Une 
Ordonnance  de  la  meme  annee  etablit  tout  un  programme  quotidien  de  net- 
toyage de  trottoirs  par  les  habitants  des  divers  quartiers.  Les  faiseurs  de  pro- 


ALAN  SOONS 


349 


jets,  voire  des  utopistes,  puUulaient  apres  ravenement  des  Bourbons:  I'idee 
de  Vicente  Alonso  Torralva,  architecte  municipail  de  Tolede,  d'une  "machine 
de  nettoyage"  —  essentiellement  une  charrette  attelee  a  des  mulets,  et  peut- 
etre  I'appareil  remarque  par  le  marquis  de  la  Villa  de  San  Andres  —  appela  apres 
1738  des  reponses  serieuses  ou  loufoques,  comme  celle  du  graphomane  Andres 
Marti,  "capitaine  des  galeres."  S'ensuivirent  I'Ordonnance  de  1745  et  la  Repre- 
sentation de  1747,  toujours  au  sujet  de  la  malproprete,  et  toujours  meprisees 
de  tout  le  monde.  Nous  arrivons  enfm  a  I'epoque  meme  du  De  Matriti  sordibus. 

La  mort  de  Ferdinand  VI  en  1759  a  change  tout  cela.  Son  frere  et  suc- 
cesseur  Charles  III,  roi  de  Naples,  et  sa  femme  se  sentirent  ecoeures  par  le 
Madrid  qui  les  attendait.  Avec  eux  arriva  cependant  le  ministre  prince  d'Es- 
quilache,  et  peu  apres  I'ingenieur  sicilien  Francesco  Sabatini.  Des  1761  celui- 
ci  avait  presente  son  Instruction,  et  des  1762  les  pourceaux,  meme  ceux, 
accoutumes  a  roder  a  travers  les  places  et  ruelles,  qui  etaient  de  la  propriete 
des  moines  de  Saint-Antoine-l'Abbe.  Le  ministre  Esquilache  put  en  moins  de 
quatre  ans  presenter  a  son  souverain  une  capitale  des  plus  propres. 

La  population,  voire  les  honnetes  bourgeois,  se  mit  d'ailleurs  a  gronder. 
Les  immondices  dans  leurs  nouveaux  depots  sous  terre  pouvaient,  semble- 
t-il,  contaminer  maintenant  les  puits,  et  les  maladies  se  repandre  sur  la  ville 
a  cause,  naturellement,  des  airs  desormais  trop  subtils.  Dans  un  detail  plus 
trivial,  faut-il  ajouter,  il  y  eut  cause  de  friction  avec  les  autorites.  Iriarte,  et 
avant  lui  Blainville,  nous  avaient  enseigne  que  le  pieton  le  plus  prudent,  et 
aussi  de  temps  a  autre  un  malheureux  voyageur  en  carrosse,  devaient  s'ha- 
biller  d'une  longue  cape  et  mettre  un  chapeau  a  ailes  tres  larges  et  pendantes, 
contre  la  chute  des  ordures  des  fenetres.  Malgre  les  nouvelles  ordonnances, 
les  pietons  de  Madrid  avaient  encore  I'air  de  se  mefier  de  leurs  voisins.  Voici 
peut-etre  une  explication  tout  a  fait  differente  des  fameuses  emeutes  de  1766, 
lors  des  raccourcis  effectues  en  masse  par  les  agents  d'Esquilache  en  capes  et 
chapeaux.  Ce  ne  serait  pas  seulement  une  resistance  offerte  aux  Lumieres 
par  les  citadins.  L'ordure  ne  revint  d'ailleurs  jamais,  et  Iriarte  de  le  celebrer 
dans  son  epigramme  "De  Matriti  monditie  a  Carolo  III  rege  inducta,  extem- 
porale": 

Quam  Coelo  tam  pura  Solo  fit  Mantua  Coelum 
lupiter  huic  fecit,  Carolus  ipse  Solum. 

Dans  son  poeme  inacheve  Iriarte  hesite  done  au  moment  d'invoquer  I'ar- 
rivee  d'un  monarque-sauveur,  nouvel  Alcide,  qui  guiderait  sa  ville  capitale 
vers  un  age  heroique  jadis  interrompu,  oii  elle  serait  digne  des  ancetres. 

State  University  of  New  York  at  Buffalo. 


350  JUAN   DE  IRIARTE  ET  LES  COURANTS  d'iDEES 

Notes 


1.  C.  -J.  Classen.  DieStadt  im  Spiegel der Descriptiones  um/Laudes.  Hildesheim:  Olms, 
1980.  23. 

2.  Odette  Sauvage.  Introduction  a  son  edition  d'Eustache  Knobelsdorf,  Lutetiae  de- 
scriptio  (1567).  Grenoble:  Universite  de  Langues  et  Lettres,  1978.  "Les  descriptions  des 
villes,"  15-16. 

3.  Classen.  Die  Stadt.  23. 

4.  Les  Argumentorum  ludicrorum  et  amoenitatum  scriptores  varii.  In  gratiam  studiosae  iuven- 
tutis  collecti  et  emendati  (Leyde:  Basson,  1623)  n'offrent  que  le  "Luti  encomium"  de  Mai- 
oragius,  avec  une  section,  259-261  sur  le  "Stercus  hominis." 

5.  Juan  de  Iriarte.  Obras  sueltas.  Madrid:  Mena,  1774. 

6.  Entre  beaucoup  d'etudes  recentes  de  la  notion  du  Monde  ren verse  on  pourrait 
consulter  la  premiere  partie  de  Barbara  Babcock  (presente  par)  Forms  of  Symbolic  In- 
version. The  Reversible  World.  Ithaca:  Cornell  University  Press,  1978;  et  pour  la  notion 
chez  les  Romains,  Hedwig  Kenner.  Das  Phdnomen  der  verkehrten  Welt  in  der  griechisch- 
romischen  Antike.  Klagenfurt,  1970. 

7.  Plutarque,  "Vie  de  Romulus,"  XI,  2  et  XI,  4.  Tite-Live,  I,  vii,  12.  Commente 
par  Joseph  Rykwert.  The  Idea  of  a  Town  (Princeton,  1976),  117  et  161. 

8.  Tommaso  Stigliani,  La Merdeide dans  Capitoli bvrleschi d'incerto autore,  s.l.,  s.d.  (1645?). 
De  Blainville.  "Madrid  ridicule,"  240-251  et  De  Waleff  "Les  Rues  de  Madrid.  Poeme," 
252-273  dand  S.  Durieu.  "Deux  poemes  frangais  sur  Madrid,"  Revue  hispanique,  45 
(1919),  239-273. 

9.  Ab  urbe  condita,  V,  lii,  2. 

10.  Sur  Ticonius,  Heinrich  Scholz.  Glaube  und  Unglaube  in  der  Weltgeschichte  (Leipzig 
1911,  reimprime  1967),  78-81.  Sur  la  mauvaise  odeur  de  I'enfer  on  pourrait  citer  An- 
tonio Rusca.  De  inferno  (Milan,  1621);  "An  sulphur  accensum  in  gehenna  vere  foeteat. 
Id  ab  aliquibus  in  dubium  revocari.  Communi  doctorum  sententia,  exhalare  putidum 
odeorem,"  lieu  cite  par  D.  P.  Walker.  The  Decline  of  Hell  (Chicago,  1964)  62,  qui  ap- 
proche  aussi  les  Exercices  de  Saint  Ignace  Loyola. 

1 1 .  Louis  Moulinier.  Le  Pur  et  I'impur  dans  la  pensee  des  Grecs,  d'Homere  a  Aristote  (Paris: 
Klincksieck,  1952),  212-216,  et  Robert  Parker.  Miasma.  Pollution  and  Purification  in  Early 
Greek  Religion  (Oxford,  1983),  ch.  IX,  "Purifying  the  City." 

12.  Parker.  Miasma,  272-273. 

13.  Roger  Mucchielli.  "L'Utopie  de  Thomas  Moms"  dans  L^j  Utopies  a  la  Renaissance 
(Bruxelles,  1964),  99-106.  Ce  paradigme,  104. 

14.  Gaston  Bachelard.  LEau  et  les  reves.  Essai  sur  I'imagination  de  la  matiere  (Paris:  Corti, 
1942),  142-144. 

15.  Giovanni  Solinas.  Studi  suWIllumunismo  (Florence:  La  Nuova  Italia,  1966),  89. 

16.  Sur  I'irritabilite  et  le  developpement  de  la  notion  dans  les  ecrits  de  Francis  Glis- 
son  (1597-1677)  on  consulte  Owsei  Temkin.  "The  Classical  Roots  of  Glisson's  Doc- 
trine of  Irritation"  dans  The  Double  Face  of  Janus  and  Other  Essays  on  the  History  of  Medicine 
(Baltimore:  Johns  Hopkins  U.P.,  1977),  290-316. 

17.  Sur  la  notion  d'infection  selon  Fracastoro  et  Sydenham,  Temkin.  Double  Face, 
456-471,  "An  Historical  Analysis  of  the  Concept  of  Infection." 

18.  Sur  la  katharsis,  Moulinier.  Le  Pur,152.  Sur  les  airs  et  les  maladies,  Genevieve 
Miller,  "  'Airs,  Waters  and  Places'  in  History, "youma/  of  the  History  of  Medicine,  1 7  (1962), 
129-140. 


ALAN  SOONS  35I 


19.  Benito  Jeronimo  Feijoo.  Discurso  I,  vi  ("Regimen  para  conservar  la  salud"), 
Teatro  cntico  universal  (1726).  Le  professeur  de  college  du  jeune  Iriarte,  le  Pere  Poree, 
avait  aussi  tonne  contre  les  enterrements  dans  les  eglises  urbaines. 

20.  Baron  Karl  Heinrich  von  Gleichen.  Denkwiirdigkeiten  (Leipzig,  1847),  cite  par 
Benedetto  Croce.  Nuovi  saggi  (Bari,  1931),  225,  n.  1. 

21.  D'apres  Frangois  Duchesneau.  La  Physiologie  des  Lumieres.  Empirisme,  modeles  et 
theories  (La  Haye:  Nijhoff,  1982)  dans  son  chapitre  "Le  corps  de  I'etre  vivant,  meca- 
nique  per  excellence,"  notamment  p.  51.  Janine  Basso  cite  de  meme  Paris  comme  "un 
corps  immense  parcouru  par  des  mouvements  d'absorption  et  de  dejection"  dans  "Genese 
et  contestation  du  mythe  de  Paris  chez  quelques  voyageurs  italiens  du  XVII^  siecle" 
dans  La  Ville  dans  la  litterature  italienne  moderne.  Mythe  et  realite  (Lille  et  Paris,  1974),  20. 

22.  Sur  la  coction,  Roger  Darouenne.  "Theorie  de  la  sante  et  de  la  maladie  a  la 
fm  du  XVIII^  siecle"  dans  Etudes  sur  le  XVIIF  siecle  (Bruxelles,  1975),  117. 

23.  Robert  Mauzi.  L'Idee  du  bonheur  dans  la  litterature  frangaise  au  18^  siecle  (Paris,  1969) 
consacre  tout  un  chapitre  a  la  sociabilite,  590-601.  Sur  les  liens  entre  la  physiologie 
et  la  vie  affective  de  I'individu:  participation  de  I'ame  ou  des  principes  vitaux  imma- 
nents;  I'Archeus  ou  Yanima  qui  "preside"  sur  les  fibres  "irritables"  selon  Van  Helmont 
et  autres,  Temkin.  The  Double  Face,  428.  La  cite  aussi  aurait  sa  vie  affective  dans  la 
sociabilite  de  ses  citoyens. 

24.  Samuel  Sorbiere.  "Discours  sceptique  de  la  beaute  de  Paris  et  de  ce  qu'il  a  d'in- 
commode"  dans  Lettres  et  discours  (Paris,  1660),  590. 

25.  Sur  ce  personnage,  Antonio  Dominguez  Ortiz.  "Una  vision  critica  del  Madrid 
del  siglo  XVIIF  dans  Hechos y  figuras  del  siglo  XVIII espahol  (Madrid:  Siglo  XXI^,  1980), 
151-176.  Sur  la  "maree,"  154. 

26.  D.  Ringrose.  "Madrid  and  Spain.  Patterns  of  Social  and  Economic  Change"  dans 
City  and  Society  in  the  Eighteenth  Century,  presente  par  Paul  Fritz  et  D.  Williams  (To- 
ronto, 1973),  59-75.  Sur  le  calcul  economique,  66-7  et  71.  On  se  souvient  aussi  des 
liens  etablis  satiriquement  entre  immondices  dans  les  rues  et  exploitation  immoderee 
des  denrees  d'une  nation  dans  Jonathan  Swift.  "An  Elxamination  of  Certain  Abuses, 
Corruptions  and  Enormities  in  the  City  of  Dublin"  (1732). 

27.  Je  n'ai  pas  pu  consulter  I'oeuvre  de  Nemesio  Fernandez-Cuesta  y  Porta.  La  lim- 
pieza  en  Madrid  (JsAaidTid,  1922).  L'essentiel  maintenant  dans  Luis  Cervera  Vera.  "Fran- 
cisco Sabatini  y  sus  normas  para  el  saneamiento  de  Madrid,"  Armies  del  Instituto  de  Estudios 
Madrilenos,  11  (1975),  137-189. 

28.  "Es  muy  desagradable.  Hay  mucho  que  hacer,"  a  declare  la  reine  Amelie,  selon 
Danvila  y  CoUado.  Historia  general  de  Espana,  II,  81. 

29.  Cervera  Vera,  "Sabatini,"  176. 

30.  Apres  tout,  "les  dangers  et  les  punitions  qui  s'attachent  a  la  pollution  ne  repre- 
sentent  que  des  moyens  d'imposer  la  conformite,"  selon  I'anthropologue  Mary  Dou- 
glas, "Pollution,"  dans  David  L.  Sills,  compilateur,  International  Encyclopedia  of  the  Social 
Sciences  (New  York,  1979),  336-342,  notamment  341.  On  pourrait  reperer  un  autre 
aspect  des  Lumieres,  en  Allemagne,  ou  un  decret  imperial  avait  en  1731  leve  la 
disgrace  hereditaire  des  nettoyeurs  de  rues,  regardes  auparavant  comme  des  Schun 
a  moitie  demoniaques.  Werner  Danckert  suppose  parce  qu'ils  remuent  la  sperma  mai- 
orum  enclose  dans  la  poussiere  comme  un  principe  de  vie  jaillissant  du  monde  des  morts. 
Unehrliche  Leute.  Die  verfehmten  Berufe  (Bern  et  Munich:  Francke,  1963),  199-200. 


The  Latin  Psalm  Paraphrases 
of  Theodore  de  Beze 

Thomas  Thomson 

Theodore  de  Beze  is  well  known  as  a  Reformed  statesman,  theolo- 
gian and  educator,  the  first  biographer  of  Calvin  and  the  successor 
to  Calvin  in  Geneva.  He  was  also  the  author  of  the  play  Abraham 
sacrifiant  (Geneva,  1550),  commonly  regarded  as  the  first  French  tragedy,  and 
wrote  the  widely  used  Confession  de  la  joy  chrestienne  (1559),  sermons,  theological 
treatises,  and  biblical  commentaries  in  both  Latin  and  French  which  were  to 
shape  the  development  of  the  Reformed  tradition.^  His  best-known  vernac- 
ular achievement,  apart  from  the  Abraham  sacrifiant,  was  undoubtedly  the  com- 
pletion of  Clement  Marot's  work,  first  begun  in  the  1530s,  of  rendering  all 
the  Psalms  into  French  verse.  In  1551,  with  the  encouragement  of  Calvin,  Beze 
published  renderings  of  thirty-four  Psalms,  to  which  he  added  six  in  1554  and 
one  in  1556,  and  by  1562  he  had  published  his  101  versions.  These  he  added 
to  the  existing  forty-nine  versions  by  Marot  to  form  what  is  now  called  the 
Marot-Beze  Ps2ilter.^ 

I  should  like  to  examine  one  important  aspect  of  Beze's  versifying  of  the 
Psalms  which  has  received  little  critical  attention,  namely  his  Latin  verse  pa- 
raphrases of  the  Psalms  which  begin  life  in  the  1560s  as  examples  of  Beze's 
strong  post-conversion  interest  in  and  practice  of  religious  and  moralising  verse 
as  evidenced  by  the  growing  corpus  of  his  post- 1548  Latin  poetry.  The  pa- 
raphrases were  eventually  completed  in  1579  as  examples  of  this  interest  and 
practice  and  of  his  continuing  concern  for  biblical  exegesis  already  manifested 
in  his  annotated  Latin  translation  of  the  Greek  text  of  the  New  Testament  (Gen- 
eva, 1557),  to  which  is  added  in  1565  and  in  later  editions  his  important  crit- 
ical edition  of  the  Greek  New  Testament. 

During  this  period  of  religious  strife  and  ferment  much  interest  was  taken 
in  the  elucidation  of  the  Psalms,  which  embodied  to  a  specizd  degree  the  very 
word  of  God.  In  view  of  the  literal  nature  of  the  Vulgate  tradition  and  the  short- 
comings of  Jerome's  version,  there  was  still  much  scope  for  a  clear  translation 
that  would  enlist  the  aid  of  biblical  exegesis  and  the  rapidly  developing  science 


354  LATIN   PSALM  PARAPHRASES 

of  textual  criticism,  both  based  on  a  sound  knowledge  of  Hebrew,  Greek,  and 
Latin.  Various  attempts  at  Latin  prose  translations,  paraphrases  and  exegetic 
commentaries  were  made,  most  notably  by  Santes  Pagnini  (Lyons,  1528),  Mar- 
tin Bucer  (Strasbourg,  1529),  Frans  Tittelmans  (Antwerp,  1531),  Johannes 
Campensis  (Antwerp,  1532),  Reynier  Snoy  (Cologne,  1536),  and  Frangois  Vat- 
able  (Paris,  1545).  Given  this  amount  of  activity,  and  the  fact  that  the  ver- 
sifying of  prose  texts  was  a  school  exercise,  the  challenge  of  rendering  into  Latin 
verse  individual  Psalms,  substantial  groups  of  Psalms,  or  even  the  entire  Psadter 
was  soon  taken  up.'^  Although  the  Scotsman  George  Buchanan,  that  giant 
among  sixteenth-century  Psalm  paraphrasts,  was  not  the  first  to  work  in  this 
field,  he  was  probably  the  first  to  render  the  whole  of  the  Psalms  into  lyric 
metres,  breaking  away  from  the  paraphrases  of  the  entire  Psalter  by  Frangois 
Bonade  (Paris,  1531),  Helius  Eobanus  Hessus  (Marburg,  1537),  Johann  Span- 
genberg  (Magdeburg,  1544),  and  Adam  Siber  (Basle,  1562),  which  were  com- 
posed exclusively  in  elegiac  couplets.^  In  doing  so,  Buchanan  followed  the 
principles  and  practice  of  Jean  de  Gagnay,  an  orthodox  Paris  theologian  and 
a  prolific  author  and  editor,  whose  Latin  verse  paraphrases  of  Psalms  1-75 
had  appeared  at  Paris  in  1547,  and  who  believed  that  the  feeling  and  tone  of 
each  Psalm  should  be  reflected  in  the  choice  of  metre,  for  which  there  is  no 
Hebrew  equivalent.^  Buchanan  set  an  example  that  other  paraphrasts  of  the 
whole  Psalter  would  follow.  Between  the  publication  of  his  complete  version 
in  1565  or  1566  and  that  of  Beze  in  1579  there  appeared  at  least  four  versions 
that  use  a  variety  of  metres:  those  of  Benito  Arias  Montano  (Antwerp,  1573), 
Hans  Christoph  Fuchs  (Schmalkalden,  1574),  Giovanni  Matteo  Toscano  (Paris, 
1575),  and  Friedrich  Widebram  (Strasbourg,  1579). 

The  earliest  evidence  of  Beze's  interest  in  versifying  the  Psalter,  evidence 
dating  from  the  period  before  his  conversion  to  Protestantism  and  departure 
for  Geneva  in  October  1548,  is  to  be  found  in  his  273-line  hexameter  Praefatio 
poetica  to  the  Penitential  Psalms  in  general  and  to  Psalm  5 1  in  particular  which 
was  included  in  his  Poemata  of  1548.  From  this  indirect  beginning  and  from 
his  involvement  with  the  French  Psalter  spring  the  firstfruits  of  Beze's  creative 
work  of  rendering  the  entire  Psalter  into  Latin  verse:  paraphrases  of  Psalms 
1,  2,  6,  15  and  104  and  of  verses  1-17  of  Psalm  18,  printed  with  the  incipits 
of  the  Vulgate.  These  appear  in  late  1565  or  early  1566,  published  by  Henri 
and  Robert  Estienne  at  the  end  of  the  first  edition  of  Buchanan's  complete  ver- 
sion and  before  the  Greek  verse  paraphrases  by  Henri  Estienne,  Flo  rent  Chres- 
tien,  Frederic  Jamot,  and  an  anonymous  contributor.  Beze's  versions  reappear 
in  Josiah  Rihel's  derivative  Strasbourg  edition  of  1566,  but  with  no  reference 
on  the  title-page  to  their  inclusion.  They  are  subsequently  omitted  from  the 
body  of  Rihel's  1568  edition.^ 

Beze  next  published,  in  the  second,  expurgated  edition  of  his  Poemata  ap- 
pearing from  the  press  of  Henri  Estienne  at  Geneva  in  mid- 1569,  a  collection 
of  twenty-three  Latin  paraphrases.^  These  include,  with  a  small  number  of 


THOMAS  THOMSON  355 

substantive  variants,  the  six  versions  ailready  published.  It  is  not  without  some 
importance  that  Beze  should  choose  to  place  these  versions  right  at  the  be- 
ginning of  this  edition  of  his  poems:  they  help  to  establish,  along  with  the  letter- 
preface  to  Andre  Dudycz,  his  espousal  of  a  more  transcendent  set  of  values 
than  those  of  a  merely  secular  humanism.  The  Praefatio  poetica,  now  287  lines 
long,  reappeared  among  the  1569  silvae,  in  a  much  altered  and  more  decorous 
form. 

The  more  correct  state  of  the  twenty-three  paraphrases  and  of  the  Praefatio 
poetica  was  reproduced  in  Beze's  Volumen  Tractationum  Theologicarum,  contain- 
ing sixteen  works  by  Beze  and  published  at  Geneva  by  Jean  Crespin  in  1570 
(Gardy,  no.  258).^  The  texts  do  not  feature  in  later  revised  editions  of  this 
work. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  third  edition  of  Beze's  Poemata,  published  at  Geneva 
by  Henri  Estienne  in  1576  and  whose  text  derives  from  the  less  correct  state 
of  the  1569  Poemata,^^  the  1569  collection  of  paraphrases  appeared  (with  some 
variants),  to  which  was  added  a  group  of  seven  complete  paraphrases  and  one 
partial  paraphrase  -  Psalms  11,  23,  75,  82,  92,  125,  150  and  Psalm  18,  verses 
18-50  — so  that  now  there  is  a  collection  of  thirty  paraphrases,  all  printed  with 
the  incipits  of  the  Vulgate. 

It  may  seem  that  these  paraphrases  are  published  rather  haphazardly:  they 
appear  to  follow  no  logical  or  thematic  sequence,  nor  is  Beze's  choice  deter- 
mined to  any  great  extent  by  those  Psalms  that  he  had  already  rendered  into 
French  for  the  Marot-Beze  Psalter.  The  rubric  of  the  1570  text,  however,  pro- 
vides a  clue  as  to  Beze's  long-term  intentions.  It  reads:  "Aliquot  Psalmi  Da- 
vidici,  variis  numeris  a  Theodoro  Beza  expressi.  Integri,  si  dederit  Dominus, 
futuri  operis  specimen."  This  statement  of  intent  can  be  followed  up  in  two 
letters  from  the  correspondence  that  he  exchanged  with  the  Scotsman  Sir  Peter 
Young  who  had  studied  in  Geneva  from  1559  to  1568  and  was  now  joint  tutor, 
along  with  George  Buchanan,  of  the  young  James  VI.  ^^  A  letter  to  Young  (22 
July  1577)  reveals  that  Beze  has  completed  his  version,  albeit  in  the  shadow 
of  Buchanan  —  a  leitmotiv  of  Beze  in  this  matter  —  and  would  like  the  two  sets 
of  paraphrases  to  be  published  together.  ^^  Some  eight  months  later  Beze 
writes  to  Young  in  a  letter  (5  March  1578),  expressing  his  hesitation  about 
publishing  his  own  versions,  again  suggesting  that  they  should  appear  jointly 
with  those  of  Buchanan,  proposing  that  they  be  dedicated  to  James  VI,  and 
asking  for  Young's  comments  on  the  matter.*^ 

Young  must  have  approved  of  Beze's  plans  to  publish  his  own  version,  since 
the  paraphrases  are  next  spoken  of  in  the  records  of  the  Geneva  City  Council 
(16  March  1579),  where  Beze  himself  (and  not  a  printer  or  publisher)  is  granted 
a  double  permis  d'imprimer  and  a  privilege  for  six  years  for  "les  Pseaumes  qu'il 
a  traduictz  en  vers  latins  avec  paraphrase"  and  for  a  French  translation  of  the 
same  "s'il  echet  cy  apres  d'imprimer  et  traduire  lesd.  paraphrases  en  fran- 
Qois."^'^  The  complete  version  fmally  appeared  in  mid- 1579,  perhaps  from 


356  LATIN   PSALM  PARAPHRASES 

the  press  of  Beze's  friend  Eustache  Vignon,  with  the  title  Psalmorum  Davidis 
et aliorum prophetarum,  libri quinque.  Argumentis et Latina  Paraphrasiillustrati,  ac ettam 
vario  carminum genere  htine  expressi.  Theodoro  Beza  Vezelio  Auctore.  (Gardy,  no.  229). 
This  substantial  octavo  volume  is  dedicated,  in  an  eight-page  epistle  (16  May 
1579),  to  the  Huguenot  sympathiser  Henry  Hastings,  third  Earl  of  Hunting- 
don, one  of  whose  nephews,  Francis,  was  at  the  time  in  Geneva. ^^  The  text 
is  prefaced  by  seven  liminary  poems  in  Hebrew,  Greek  and  Latin  by  friends 
and  Genevan  colleagues.  Beze  has  not,  however,  contented  himself  with  rend- 
ering all  150  Psalms  into  a  wide  variety  of  metres  and  strophic  forms.  He  has 
also  included  for  each  Psalm  a  prose  argumentum,  a  prose  paraphrasis  and  a  prose 
interpretatio .  In  the  argumenta,  he  says,  "et  summam  et  usum  [Psalmorum],  atque 
adeo  methodum,  quoties  opus  fuit,  sua  cuique  classe  attributa,  explicavi"  (fols. 
*4^-  *5'^).  He  has  taken  care  to  divide  the  Psalms  into  classes  such  as  8i8ax- 
Tixo?,  £xxXriaiaaTixo(;,  otxovo(xixo(;,  Tzpo(fr\'zixo(;  and  7rapa(xu0riTixo(;.  He  has  in- 
cluded what  he  calls  a  "novam,  eamque  brevem  simulac  perspicuam 
paraphrasim"  because  of  the  many  (understandable)  deficiencies  which  he  has 
noted  in  the  paraphrases  of  Campensis.  In  composing  this  paraphrasis,  he  has 
had  recourse  to  "doctissimorum  Theologorum  commentariis"  but,  he  continues: 

in  nuUius  tamen  verba  iuratus:  adeo  quidem  ut  interdum  a  mea  quoque 
Gallica  versione  discesserim,  tum  quod  sint  Beuxepai;  9povTi8£(;  ao96L)T£- 
pa?,  tum  quod  plures  ac  diversas  explicationes  saepe  unus  idemque  locus 
admittat.  (fol.  *4'') 

The  origin  of  the  interpretatio  is  the  German  theologian  Heinrich  Moller's  three- 
volume  Psalm  commentary  published  at  Wittenberg  in  1573-1574,  with  "pau- 
culis  tantum  a  me  immutatis  et  interdum  emoUitis."^ 

What  are  the  reasons  Beze  gives  for  undertaking  the  arduous  task  of  pa- 
raphrasing all  the  Psalms?  Firstly,  he  says,  after  the  completion  of  the  Marot- 
Beze  Psalter: 

magis  ac  magis  [Psalmorum]  lectione  ac  meditatione  delectatus,  tentavi 
quoque  Latinis  numeris  nonnuUos  exprimere,  minime  id  quidem  quod 
assequi  me  ullo  modo  posse  divini  spiritus  illius  dignitatem  existimarem, 
sed  ut  iis  quae  legissem  altius  animo  infigendis  haec  mihi  exercitatio  pro- 
desset.  (fols.  *3"-*4') 

To  this  important  mnemonic  function  of  verse  paraphrase  was  added  the  temp- 
tation to  do  better  than  other  paraphrasts  except,  of  course,  George  Buchanan: 

Quinetiam  fateor  me  quorundam  pessima  carmina  legentem  .  .  .  non  po- 
tuisse  non  vehementissime  commoveri  ut  etiam  sim  ausus  an  minus 
malum  aliquid  huius  generis  praestare  possem  experiri:  quem  meum  co- 
natum  etsi  doctissimi  et  plane  cum  veteribus  etiam  optimis  comparandi, 
meo  iudicio,  poetae  Georgii  Buchanani  editum  poema  retardavit,  am- 
icorum  tamen  suasu  sum  ad  fmem  usque  persequutus.  (fol.  *4'^) 


THOMAS  THOMSON  357 

Indeed,  he  goes  on  to  voice  the  modest  hope  that  his  work  will  not  be  without 
some  vcilue  to  the  Church  and  consoles  himself  by  using  the  words  of  Aeneas 
to  the  dying  Lausus: 

abunde  mihi  satisfactum  erit  si  non  inutilis  hie  meus  labor  Ecclesiae  fuerit, 
illud  quoque  Maronis  me  consolabitur,  Aeneae  magni  dextra  cadis,  (fol.  *4'^) 

An  abbreviated  version  of  the  1579  edition  appeared  from  the  same  printer 
in  the  same  year  and  was  announced  for  the  same  Frankfurt  autumn  book- fair 
(Gardy,  no.  230).  It  was  reissued  with  an  updated  title-page  in  1580.^^  It  con- 
tains only  the  metrical  versions  and  the  Praefatio  poetica,  some  of  the  liminary 
poems,  and  all  of  the  1579  preface,  where  the  following  passage  is  inserted  to 
account  for  the  omission  of  the  commentaries  and  the  prose  version: 

Sunt  autem  ista  omnia  [sc.  the  commentaries  and  the  prose  version]  simul 
alio  volumine  excusa,  cuius  pretio  ne  gravarentur  lectores  eruditiores, 
quibus  neque  ista  paraphrasi  neque  argumentis  ad  hunc  intelligendum 
librum  opus  est,  quos  tamen  fortasse  iuverit  versiculos  nostros  lectitare, 
visum  est  hos  quoque  seorsim  excudendos  tradere.  (fol.  *5'") 

This  edition  forms  the  major  part  of  a  volume  brought  out  by  the  Genevan 
publisher  Jacob  Stoer  in  1590  (Gardy,  no.  235).  Stoer  had  clearly  bought  up 
the  sheets  of  the  abbreviated  first  edition,  possibly  after  the  death  of  Eustache 
Vignon  in  1588,  so  that  the  contents  of  the  Psalms  section  of  the  volume  are: 
a  new  title-page  within  2in  identical  cartouche  to  that  of  1579;  a  slightly  reset 
text  of  the  1579  preface,  with  its  insertion,  and  a  reset  text  of  the  liminary  poems; 
Beze's  poem  on  Buchanan,  which  had  first  appeared  in  the  1569  Poemata\  an 
additional  liminary  poem  from  a  Genevan  colleague;  and  pages  1-286  of  the 
abbreviated  1579  text.  To  this  are  added  Beze's  paraphrase  in  trochaic  dim- 
eters catalectic  of  the  Song  of  Songs  which  had  already  been  published  by  Vig- 
non in  1584  (Gardy,  no.  356),  and  a  total  of  seventeen  metrical  canticles,  each 
prefaced  by  a  brief  prose  argumentum,  by  Louis  des  Masures,  Jean  Jaquemot, 
and  Scevole  de  Sainte-Marthe. 

Pirate  editions  of  the  complete  text  of  the  first  edition  were  published  in  1580 
at  Antwerp  by  Gillis  van  den  Rade  (omitting  all  the  liminary  poems  and  the 
Praefatio  poetica)  (Gardy,  no.  232)  and  at  London  by  the  French  Huguenot  Tho- 
mas VautroUier  (Gardy,  no.  233).  The  typographical  errors  of  the  first  edi- 
tion, which  were  perpetuated  in  these  editions,  and  the  additional  errors  that 
had  crept  into  them  led  Beze  to  publish  a  second  edition  of  the  paraphrases 
at  Geneva  in  1580  (Gardy,  no.  231),  reissued  there  with  an  updated  title-page 
in  1581  (Gardy,  no.  234).  The  1579  preface  was  retained,  with  a  few  changes 
and  a  substantial  interpolated  passage  explaining  the  necessity  for  a  second 
edition  (fols.  a5''-a6'^).  Omitted  were  the  Praefatio  poetica,  one  of  the  liminary 
poems  in  Latin,  and  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  liminary  verses.  Beze  says  that 
he  has  revised  parts  of  the  text,  although  he  is  aware  that  "[haec  altera  editio] 


358  LATIN   PSALM   PARAPHRASES 

.  .  .  ne  nunc  quidem  tarn  est  pura  quam  esse  debuit"  (fol.  aG*).  He  has  added, 
at  the  end  of  the  paraphrases,  an  argumentum,  a.  paraphrasis ,  and  an  interpretatio 
on  each  of  fourteen  canticles  from  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  having  been 
deterred  from  turning  the  canticles  into  Latin  verse  for  three  reasons: 

partim  quorundam  locorum  difficultas,  de  quibus  amplius  deliberandum 
censeo,  partim  peculiaris  quaedam  <st\L^6vr\q  et  [xeyaXoTcpeTieta  inimita- 
bilis,  temporis  denique  angustia.  (fols.  diG"'") 

Beze  never  did  render  them  into  Latin  verse,  but  this  deficiency  was  reme- 
died in  Stoer's  edition  of  1590  by  the  simple  expedient  of  using  metrical  can- 
ticles by  other  poets. 

All  the  later  editions  of  Beze's  paraphrases,  except  that  published  by  Stoer, 
reproduced  the  complete,  unaltered  text  of  this  second  edition.  The  first  of  these 
was  the  joint  edition  of  Beze's  paraphrases  and  those  of  Buchanan  from  the 
press  of  Jean  Le  Preux  at  Morges  in  1581.^^  This  joint  edition,  which  was  an- 
nounced in  the  Frankfurt  autumn  book-fair  catalogue,  was  the  only  one  pub- 
lished before  Buchanan's  death  in  September  1582  and  may  well  have  appeared 
without  the  Scotsman's  blessing.  The  only  other  joint  edition  —  which  was  also 
the  last  edition  of  Beze's  versions  —  was  published  at  Geneva  by  Le  Preux's 
younger  brother  Frangois  in  1593  and  was  reissued  with  an  updated  title- 
page  in  1594  (Gardy,  nos.  236  and  237).^^  Frangois  also  published  Beze's  ver- 
sions in  a  posthumous  one-volume  folio  edition  of  MoUer's  Psalm  commen- 
tary (Geneva,  1591),  where  the  metrical  version  follows  Moller's  argumentum, 
translation,  and  commentaries,  and  an  anonymous  contributor's  theses  seu  ob- 
servationes  locorum  doctrinae  on  each  Psalm. ^^ 

So  ends  the  publishing  history  of  Beze's  Latin  Psalm  paraphrases,  span- 
ning a  period  of  just  under  thirty  years,  brief  indeed,  when  compared  with 
the  lasting  popularity  of  Buchanan's  versions,  which  go  through  some  150  edi- 
tions down  to  the  nineteenth  century. 

I  should  now  like  to  comment  in  some  detail  on  one  of  Beze's  versions,  that 
of  the  well  known  Psalm  137  "Super  flumina  Babylonis,"  first  published  in  1569: 

1  Quum  Solymae  memores,  riguae  Babylonis  ad  undas, 

Moerore  pleni  corda,  lumina  lacrymis, 

2  E  salicum  ramis  pendentia  spectaremus 

Tunc  muta,  sed  canora  quondam  nablia:  4 

3  Tum  qui  nos  patriis  adeo  crudeliter  oris 

Ludibrium  sibi  futures  traxerant, 
Non,  non  (aiebant)  lacrymas  vos  poscimus  istas, 

Solymae  sed  illos  poscimus  suaves  modos.  8 

4  Siccine  nos  vero  populis  ridenda  profanis 

Praebere  summo  sacra  carmina  numini? 

5  Quin  citharam  potius  mea  nunquam  haec  dextera  pulset, 


THOMAS  THOMSON  359 

Quam  me  Sionis  capiat  ulla  oblivio.  12 

6  Haereat  haec  (inquam)  potius  mea  lingua  palato, 

Quam  chara  menti  Sion  excidas  meae. 
Vel,  siquando  hilares  in  cantus  ora  resolvam, 

Aliunde  sumam  gaudii  primordia,  16 

7  Tu  vero  memor  esto,  Deus,  crudelis  Idume 

Illo  in  Sionem  quid  die  iacataverit: 
Quum  saevis  addens  animum  praedonibus,  eia, 

Clamaret,  urbem  perdite,  ruite,  vertite.  20 

8  Atqui  tempus  erit,  Babylon,  quum  tu  quoque  iustae 

Ultoris  irae  debitas  poenas  dabis. 

9  Tunc  o  felicem  qui  matris  ab  ubere  raptos 

Illidet  asperis  puerulos  cautibus.  24 

1  4      1576-1580  Quam  chara  tu  Sion  animae  excidas  meae. 

Given  the  religious  background  of  the  time  and  the  apocalyptic  associations 
of  the  Babylon  theme,  the  particular  relevance  of  this  Psalm  seems  to  be  adum- 
brated in  the  last  lesson  drawn  from  it  in  Beze's  1579  argumentum:  "Impune 
nunquam  suum  scelus  laturos  Ecclesiae  oppressores,  ac  praesertim  eos  qui  po- 
tentiorum  saevitiam  adversus  innocentes  accendunt"  (fol.  Ss7'^).  The  Psalm 
seems  to  be  the  lament  of  an  exile  who  has  had  to  endure  the  Babylonian  cap- 
tivity, cut  off  from  his  homeland  and,  as  he  sees  it,  from  his  God,  and  now 
returned  from  Babylon,  looking  with  horror  upon  the  ruins  of  his  beloved  Je- 
rusalem. The  mood  at  the  beginning  of  the  Psalm  is  one  of  melancholy  re- 
collection (verses  1-3),  followed  by  indignation  at  the  mockery  to  which  the 
Jews  are  subjected  (verses  4-6).  This  rises  to  a  climax  of  wrath  against  Edom 
and  Babylon,  a  wrath  held  in  check  for  so  long  that  it  now  erupts  into  what 
appears  to  be  blind  hatred  and  rage  (verses  7-9). 

Beze's  paraphrase  is  composed  of  alternating  dactylic  hexameters  and  iam- 
bic trimeters  (the  second  Pythiambic  strophe,  used  by  Horace  in  Epode  16  and 
by  Prudentius  and  Boethius).  The  metre  is  also  used  by  Beze  in  his  para- 
phrase of  Psalms  36  and  136  (1569)  and  in  Psalm  31  (1579). 

The  opening  chord  of  the  paraphrase  is  struck  by  Solymae  memores,  strategi- 
cally placed  in  a  hypotactic  rendering  of  the  first  three  verses  of  the  original 
structured  by  the  co-ordinating  Quum  .  .  .  Turn  of  lines  1  and  5.  The  adjective 
riguae  adds  to  the  bare  statement  of  location  and  is  justified  by  the  apostro- 
phising of  Babylon  in  the  Vulgate  Jeremiah  51 :  13  as  "quae  habitas  super  mul- 
tas  aquas"  and  by  Pliny's  reference  to  "Babylonis  rigua,"  the  water-meadows 
of  Babylon.  The  second  line  gives  a  clear  picture  of  the  Jews'  grief  and  its  out- 
ward manifestation,  reinforced  by  chiasmus  and  alliteration.  The  pathos  of  their 
plight  is  well  rendered  by  the  poet's  pointed,  chiasmic  contrast  of  line  4:  Tunc 
muta  .  .  .  canora  quondam,  not  to  be  found  in  the  original.  The  melancholy  si- 
lence of  the  people  is  reinforced  by  the  silence  of  their  consoling  musical  in- 


360  LATIN   PSALM  PARAPHRASES 

struments,  the  O vidian  nablia.  Beze  insists  on  the  cruelty  of  their  captors  by 
using  crudeliter,  by  reducing  the  captivity  almost  to  the  sole  purpose  of  Ludib- 
rium  sibifuturos,  and  by  using  the  powerful  verb  traxerant.  Their  captors'  gra- 
tuitous cruelty  is  well  emphasised  by  the  correctio  found  at  the  beginning  of  the 
direct  speech  of  line  7.  The  Jews'  indignant,  reproachful  refusal  points  up  the 
implications  of  the  original:  their  sacra  .  .  .  carmina  would  be  degraded  by  being 
used  as  entertainment  for  a  people  who  are  not  just  foreigners,  as  in  the  orig- 
inal, but  also  heathens,  populis  .  .  .  profanis.  The  ridenda  of  line  9  echoes  the  Lu- 
dibrium  of  line  6.  The  Siccine  of  line  9  has  an  extra  notation  of  self-reproach, 
suggested  in  Beze's  prose  paraphrase  of  verse  1 : 

Babylonem  illam  prophanam  abrepti,  apud  Euphratis  fluenta,  vitato  vi- 
delicet pro  viribus  impiorum  hostium  conspectu,  moestissimo  cum  silen- 
tio,  profusis  etiam  lachrymis,  culpam  simul  et  dolorem  confitebamur, 
Sionis  memores.  (fol.  Ss?"") 

Beze  now  follows  the  original's  change  of  person:  the  spectacle  of  common 
suffering  gives  way  to  the  first  person  singular  as  the  speaker's  emotion  rises. 
The  apostrophe  of  verse  5  is  transferred  to  the  rendering  of  verse  6  where  it 
is  given  the  affective  nuance  of  chara.  Beze  is  concerned  to  render  the  orig- 
inal's parallelisms  and  elegant  variation  —  but  not  its  syntactic  chiasmus  — by 
the  repetition  of  Quam  in  lines  12  and  14  and  by  the  parenthetical  use  ofinquam 
in  line  13.  Line  15  is  an  addition  by  Beze  to  express  the  almost  vain  hope 
of  a  change  in  their  fortunes  to  a  state  of  possible  happiness  reflected  in  the 
hilares  .  .  .  cantus  which  take  up  the  suaves  modos  of  line  8.  Now  the  speaker  turns 
to  address  Jehovah  directly,  the  formal  Dem  contrasting  with  the  summo  .  .  . 
numini  used  to  talk  of  Him  when  addressing  heathens.  Just  as  Beze  insists  on 
the  Babylonians'  cruelty,  so  he  now  taxes  with  cruelty  the  Edomites,  the  in- 
veterate enemies  of  Israel  who  abetted  the  Babylonians  in  their  destruction  of 
Judea.  He  reinforces  the  picture  of  their  cruel  rapaciousness  by  using  the  pow- 
erful synecdoche  crudelis  Idume,  by  adding  the  nuance  of  iactaverit,  by  having 
this  Edomite  address  saevis  .  .  .  praedonibus ,  and  by  putting  into  his  mouth  an 
accumulation  of  trisyllabic  imperatives.  The  ineluctable  destruction  of  Baby- 
lon expressed  by  the  Psalmist's  use  of  a  proleptic  past  participle,  rendered  by 
MoUer  as  vastata,  is  brought  out  by  the  menacing  Atqui  tempus  erit;  and  the  no- 
tion of  the  lex  talionis  is  clearly  underscored  by  the  omission  of  the  first  of  the 
parallelisms  of  verses  8  and  9  and  its  replacement  by  the  threatening  figure 
of  the  anonymous  Ultor  and  his  iustae .  .  .  irae.  The  last  verse  is  thus  given  more 
force  as  evidence  of  God's  omnipotence  and  as  a  scene  of  divine  retribution 
worked  out  through  a  human  instrument.  The  cruelty  of  the  extirpation  of  a 
race,  a  barbarous  act  often  perpetrated  against  Israel  in  the  Old  Testament, 
is  caught  by  the  use  of  the  Virgilian  tag  matris  ab  ubere  raptos,  by  the  added  power 
of  asperis,  and  by  the  pathos  of  the  diminutive  puerulos. 

Perhaps  Beze's  modesty  with  regard  to  Buchanan's  paraphrases  is  misplaced: 


THOMAS  THOMSON  361 

it  is  clear  that,  like  any  good  paraphrast,  Beze  has  succeeded  in  introducing 
an  element  of  poetic  ornament,  by  the  use  of  suitable  epithets  and  phrases  for 
which  there  is  no  equivalent  in  the  original,  in  capturing  the  feeling  of  the  orig- 
inal and  in  clarifying  its  meaning.  Further  study  of  Beze's  versions  and  com- 
parison of  them  with  those  of  Buchanan  might  show  that  the  two  men  should 
be  regarded  as  complementary  labourers  in  this  vineyard.  Jakob  Zwinger,  pro- 
fessor of  Greek  at  Basle  at  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century,  called  them  "duo 
luminaria  magna,  divino  huic  operi  illucentia."^^  They  have  chosen  differing 
methods  of  illumination:  Buchanan  simply  offers  a  set  of  poetic  paraphrases; 
Beze,  however,  adopts  an  approach  of  which  the  metrical  version  is  but  one 
facet. 

University  of  Dundee 


Notes 


1.  The  standard  biography  of  Beze  is  P.  F.  Geisendorf,  Theodore  de  Beze  (1949;  re- 
print Geneva,  1967).  For  a  bibliography  of  most  of  Beze's  works,  see  F.  Gardy  (with 
A.  Dufour),  Bibliographie  des  oeuvres  theologiques,  litteraires,  historiques  etjuridiques  de  Theo- 
dore de  Beze  (Geneva,  1960),  hereafter  referred  to  as  "Gardy." 

2.  For  a  critical  edition  of  Beze's  renderings,  see  Theodore  de  Beze,  Psaumes  mis 
en  vers  jranqais  (1551-1562),  accompagnes  de  la  version  en  prose  de  Lois  Bude,  ed.  P.  Pidoux 
(Geneva,  1984). 

3.  On  the  editions  of  Beze's  Latin  poetry,  see  Gardy;  T.  Thomson,  "A  Critical  Edi- 
tion of  the  Poemata  (1548)  of  Theodore  de  Beze"  (unpublished  D.  Phil,  dissertation, 
University  of  Oxford,  1983);  and  T.  Thomson,  "The  Poemata  of  Theodore  de  Beze," 
\nActa  Conventus  Neo-Latini  Sanctandreani,  ed.  I.  D.  McFarlane  (Binghamton,  NY,  1985) 
pp.  409-16. 

4.  On  Neo- Latin  Psalm  paraphrases,  see  H.  Vaganay,  Les  Traductions  du  psautier  en 
vers  latins  au  XVfsiecle  (Fribourg,  1898);  J.  A.  Gaertner,  "Latin  Verse  Translations  of 
the  Psalms,  1500-1620,"  Harvard  Theological  Review,  49  (1956):  271-305;  W.  L.  Grant, 
"Neo-Latin  Verse  Translations  of  the  Bible,"  Harvard  Theological  Review,  52  (1959):  205-1 1 ; 
I.  D.  McFarlane,  "Notes  on  the  Composition  and  Reception  of  George  Buchanan's  Psalm 
Paraphrases,"  Forum  for  Modern  Language  Studies,  7  (1971):  319-60  (  =  Renaissance  Stu- 
dies, ed.  L  D.  McFarlane,  A.  H.  Ashe,  and  D.  D.  R.  Owen  [Edinburgh  and  London, 
1972],  pp.  21-62);  and  I.  D.  McFarlane,  Buchanan  (London,  1981),  pp.  247-86. 

5.  On  Buchanan's  Psalm  paraphrases,  see  McFarlane,  "Notes";  J.  Wall,  "The  Latin 
Elegiacs  of  George  Buchanan  (1506-1582),"  Bards  and  Makars.  Scottish  Language  and  Lit- 
erature. Medieval  and  Renaissance,  ed.  A.J.  Aitken,  M.  P.  McDiarmid,  and  D.  S.  Thom- 
son (Glasgow,  1977),  pp.  184-93;  P.  J.  Ford,  "George  Buchanan  et  ses  paraphrases 
des  Psaumes,"  Acta  Conventus  Neo-Latini  Turonensis,  ed.  J.  C.  Margolin,  2  vols.  (Paris, 
1980),  2:947-57;  L  D.  McFarlane,  Buchanan;  P.J.  Ford,  George  Buchanan:  Prince  of  Poets 
(Aberdeen,  1982),  pp.  77-87;  R.  P.  H.  Green,  "George  Buchanan's  Psalm  Paraphrases: 


362  LATIN   PSALM  PARAPHRASES 

Matters  of  Metre," -^^rte  Conventus  Neo-Latini  Sanctandreani,  pp.  51-60;  and,  in  this  vol- 
ume, R.  P.  H.  Green,  "Horace's  Odes  in  the  Psalm  Paraphrases  of  Buchanan." 

6.  Gagnay's  views  are  discussed  in  McFarlane,  "Notes,"  pp.  354-55. 

7.  On  these  two  editions  of  Buchanan's  paraphrases,  see  McFarlane,  "Notes,"  pp. 
326-29. 

8.  For  a  list  of  these  versions,  see  Appendix.  On  this  edition,  see  I.  D.  McFarlane, 
"George  Buchanan's  Latin  Poems  from  Script  to  Print:  a  Preliminsiry  Survey,"  The  Li- 
brary, fifth  series,  24  (1969):  277-332  (esp.  pp.  313-14). 

9.  See  also  J.  F.  Gilmont,  Bibliographie  des  editions  dejean  Crespin,  1550-1572,  2  vols. 
(Verviers,  1981),  1,  no.  70  /  2,  where  "Gardy,  n°  228"  should  read  "Gardy,  n°  5." 

10.  On  this  edition,  see  McFarlane,  "George  Buchanan's  Latin  Poems,"  p.  313,  n.  4. 

11.  For  details  on  Young,  see  DNB,  21:1301-3;  Le  Livre  du  recteur  de  I'Academie  de 
Geneve (1559-1878),  ed.  S.  Stelling-Michaud,  6  vols.  (Geneva,  1959-1981),  6:274,  here- 
after referred  to  as  "L/?";  and  J.  Durkan,  "Henry  Scrimgeour,  Renaissance  Bookman," 
Edinburgh  Bibliographical  Society  Transactions,  5  (1)  (Sessions  1971-1974),  1-31  (passim). 

12.  Oxford,  Bodleian  Library,  MS  Smith  77,  pp.  371-75  (esp.  p.  372). 

13.  MS  Smith  77,  pp.  377-78  (esp.  p.  378).  Parts  of  these  two  letters  are  reproduced 
in  McFarlane,  Buchanan,  p.  270. 

14.  Cited  in  Gardy,  pp.  132-33. 

15.  On  Henry  Hastings,  see  DNB,  6: 126-28;  and  on  Francis  Hastings,  see  LR,  4:24. 

16.  Enarratio  Psalmorum  Davidis  excerpta  ex  praelectionibus  Henrici  Molleri,  et  edita  in  Ac- 
ademia  Witebergensi.  On  Moller,  see  Allgemeine  Deutsche  Biographic,  22:758-59. 

17.  The  1580  reissue  is  not  listed  in  Gardy. 

18.  Not  Hsted  in  Gardy;  see  McFarlane,  "Notes,"  pp.  340-41. 

19.  See  McFarlane,  "Notes,"  p.  341. 

20.  Not  listed  in  Gardy.  Enarrationis  Psalmorum  Davidis,  ex  praelectionibus  D.  Henrici  Mol- 
leri Hamburgensis  in  Academia  Witebergensi  exceptae,  postrema  editio,  prioribus  emendatior.  [.  .  .] 
D.  Th.  Bezae  eorundem  Psalmorum  Paraphrasis  poetica,  vario  carminum  genere  expressa.  [.  .  ./ 

21.  For  discussions  of  Buchanan's  version  of  this  Psalm,  see  Wall,  "The  Latin  El- 
egiacs of  George  Buchanan,"  pp.  190-93;  and  Ford,  "George  Buchanan  et  ses  paraph- 
rases des  Psaumes,"  pp.  953-55.  Wall  also  discusses  Psalms  88  and  1 14;  and  Ford  studies 
Psalms  3  and  114.  In  George  Buchanan,  Ford  discusses  Psalms  1,  6,  104  and  114. 

22.  Cited  in  McFarlane,  Buchanan,  p.  272,  n.  52. 


X 

l-H 

Q 

<: 


o 

t-H 

H 
< 
U 

O 

^ 
w 
Q 
c^ 
O 

< 
u 

o 
o 

o 

:^ 
o 

X 

u 


C/3 

W 
< 

< 
< 


< 


w 

N 
W 
pq 


^o 

^ 

in 

o 

r^ 

,v 

in 

<o 

^D 

i?5 

a> 

vo 

^o 

in 

in 

^ 

(£> 

in 

o 

•« 

in 

V£> 

VD 

tn 

O) 

vo 

a> 

vo 

vo 

r^ 

r^ 

in 

in 

in 

in 

Thomas  Morus,  Tragoedia 

Friedrich-K.   Unterweg 

Im  Jahre  der  Heiligsprechung  des  englischen  Humanisten,  Staatsmannes 
und  Martyrers  Sir  Thomas  More,  lenkt  B.  Foley  durch  einen  Artikel 
im  Venerabile,^  dem  Magazin  des  English  College  Rome  die  Aufmerk- 
samkeit  der  Offendichkeit  und  der  Morus-Forschung  im  besonderen  auf  ein 
Drama,  das  die  beiden  letzten  Jahre  aus  dem  Leben  des  grofien  Englanders 
und  die  dramatische  Auseinandersetzung  mit  Heinrich  VIII.  eindrucksvoll  be- 
handelt.  Das  lateinische  Drama,  das  seit  mehr  als  dreihundert  Jahren  in  den 
Archiven  des  KoUegiums  ruhte,  tragt  den  Titel  Thomas  Morus,  Tragoedia  und 
ist  Teil  eines  voluminosen  Foliobandes,  der  insgesamt  fiinf  Theaterstiicke  und 
drei  Interludien  enthalt,  die  mit  grofier  Wahrscheinlichkeit  zwischen  1612  und 
1613  im  English  College  aufgefiihrt  wurden.^  Abgesehen  von  dem  Stuck 
iiber  More,  fmdet  sich  darin  ein  zweites  iiber  seinen  Freund  und  Leidens- 
genossen  John  Fisher,  das  den  schlichten  Titel  Roffensis  tragt  und  meines  Wis- 
sens  das  friiheste  Werk  einer  sehr  kleinen  Gruppe  von  Dramen  iiber  den 
streitbaren  Bischof  ist.^ 

Obwohl  Foley  die  Bedeutung  der  beiden  Dramen  nachdriicklich  hervor- 
hebt,  scheint  sein  Artikel  in  der  Forschung  keine  grofiere  Resonanz  gefunden 
zu  haben.  Bis  zum  fiinfzigsten  Jubilaumsjahr  der  Heiligsprechung  Mores  und 
Fishers  sind  Editionen  oder  ausfiihrliche  vergleichende  Analysen  der  beiden 
Stiicke  nach  wie  vor  ein  Desiderat  —  ein  Faktum,  das  im  Falle  von  Thomas 
Morus,  Tragoedia  auf  die  betrachtlichen  editorischen  Probleme  der  Handschrift 
zuriickzufiihren  sein  diirfte,  die  hier,  stellvertretend  fiir  einige  andere  Dra- 
men, auf  die  noch  einzugehen  sein  wird,  kurz  umrissen  seien.'^ 

Die  fiinf  Akte  des  2100  Verse  umfassenden  Dramas  sind  von  zwei  verschie- 
denen  Handen  zu  Papier  gebracht  worden.  Hand  A,  bei  der  es  sich  um  den 
Autor  selbst  handeln  konnte,  ist  fiir  die  Akte  I  und  II  verantwortlich.  Schrift- 
bild  und  diverse  Fliichtigkeitsfehler  wie  fehlende  Buchstaben  oder  Worter 
sprechen  dafiir,  dafi  sie  mit  grofier  Hast  zu  Werke  ging.  Dadurch  ergeben 
sich  teils  erhebliche  Leseprobleme.^  Die  Akte  III,  IV  und  V  sind  insgesamt 


366  THOMAS  MORUS,   TRAGOEDIA 

gesehen  besser  lesbar,  da  sie  von  einer  weiteren  Hand  in  einer  Art  Druckschrift 
niedergeschrieben  wurden.  Durch  die  Verwendung  einer  breiten  Feder  und 
eines  stark  saugfahigen  Papiers  gibt  es  aber  auch  hier  immer  wieder  kaum 
zu  entziffernde  Stellen.^  Die  gesamte  Niederschrift  der  Tragodie  ist  meines 
Erachtens  schliefilich  von  einer  dritten  Hand  durchgesehen  und  mit  zahlreichen 
kleineren  Korrekturen  und  Erganzungen  versehen  worden.^  Hinzu  kommen, 
moglicherweise  als  Resultat  erster  Auffiihrungsversuche,  aber  auch  grofiere 
Umstellungshinweise  und  Anderungen,  die  vielfach  nicht  eindeutig  sind.^  Die 
Erstellung  eines  verlafilichen  Textes,  der  einer  Version  letzter  Hand  nahekom- 
men  wiirde,  erweist  sich  daher  als  langwieriges,  schwer  zu  losendes  Problem. 

Wenngleich  Thomas  Moms,  Tragoedia,  Rom  1612,  zweifellos  eine  der  be- 
deutendsten  und  interessantesten  der  insgesamt  etwa  130  Bearbeitungen  des 
Stoffes  ist,^  so  steht  sie  jedoch  nicht  — wie  der  Titel  meines  Vortrages  auf  den 
ersten  Blick  nahelegen  mochte,  im  Vordergrund  meiner  Ausfiihrungen.  Bei 
naherer  Betrachtung  zeigt  sich  namlich,  dafi  Thomas  Moms,  Tragoedia  ein  Teil 
eines  grofien,  zusammengehorigen  Ganzen  ist,  das  aus  verschiedenen  Griinden 
nicht  isoliert  betrachtet  werden  sollte. 

Erstens  ist  Thomas  Moms,  Tragoedia  entgegen  der  Auffassung  Foleys  nicht 
die  erste  dramatische  Bearbeitung  des  Stoffes.  Voraus  geht  das  nach  Robert 
Bolts  A  Man  for  All  Seasons^^  wohl  bekannteste  Morus-Drama,  The  Booke  of  Sir 
Thomas  Moore,  das  zwischen  1595  und  1600  entstanden  sein  diirfte.^^  Diese 
Bearbeitung  eines  elisabethanischen  Autorenteams,  zu  dem  mit  grofiter  Wahr- 
scheinlichkeit  auch  William  Shakespeare  gehorte,  scheiterte  allerdings  aus  po- 
litischen  Griinden  an  der  strengen  Zensur  Edmund  Tilneys  und  erlebte  wohl 
keine  zeitgenossische  Auffiihrung,  wahrend  dem  romischen  Stuck  unmit- 
telbar  Biihnenerfolg  beschieden  war.  "Ter  data,  semper  placuit,"  vermerkt  eine 
unbekannte  Hand  am  Ende  der  Handschrift.^^  Man  konnte  das  Stiick  daher 
allenfalls  als  erstes  aufgefiihrtes,  erstes  kontinentales  oder  erstes  lateinisches 
bezeichnen.  Doch  selbst  diese  Einordnung  mochte  Widerspruch  hervorrufen, 
da  dem  Book  of  Sir  Thomas  More  moglicherweise  schon  ein  lateinisches  Drama 
vorangeht.  Sieht  man  George  Buchanans  Aussagen  vor  der  spanischen  In- 
quisition nicht  nur  als  spontanen  Versuch  an,  einer  Verurteilung  zu  entge- 
hen,  dann  hat  er  mit  seinem  Drama  Baptistes,  sive  calumnia,  tragoedia  nicht  nur 
ein  Stiick  iiber  das  Schicksal  Johannes  des  Taufers  geschrieben,  sondern  in 
Form  eines  Schliisselstiicks  den  Morus-Stoff  schon  wenige  Jahre  nach  der  Hin- 
richtung  Mores,  etwa  zwischen  1539  und  1543,  bearbeitet.^^ 

Zweitens  scheint  mir  die  Bedeutung  des  romischen  Stiickes  nicht  so  sehr 
darin  zu  liegen,  dafi  es  sich  neben  schriftlichen  Quellen  auch  auf  miindliche 
Berichte  iiber  Mores  Martyrium  stiitzen  konnte,  die  unter  anderem  von  des- 
sen  gleichnamigen  Urenkel  stammten,^'^  als  vielmehr  in  einer  neuen,  moral- 
didaktischen  Interpretation  zu  liegen,  die  sich  aus  der  besonderen  Situation 
des  Jesuitenordens  vor  dem  Hintergrund  der  Zeitgeschichte  entwickelt  und  fiir 
lange  Zeit  strukturbestimmend  ist. 


FRIEDRICH-K.    UNTERWEG  367 

Drittens  schliefilich,  pragt  diese  Interpretation  nicht  nur  das  genannte 
Drama,  sondern  eine  Fiille  weiterer  Stiicke,  da  das  Interesse,  das  die  Jesuiten 
dem  Morus-Stoff  entgegengebracht  haben,  wesentlich  grofier  ist  als  vielfach 
angenommen.  Geht  man  die  noch  greifbaren  Spielplane  und  Litterae  Annuae 
der  Lehrstatten  des  Ordens  in  seinen  einzelnen  Provinzen  auf  dem  Kontinent 
systematisch  durch,  dann  stofit  man  in  dem  Zeitraum  von  1612  bis  1764  iiber- 
raschend  oft  auf  das  Stichwort  Thomas  Morus  Tragoedia,  oder  schlicht  Thomas 
Morus.  Wie  die  Tabelle  am  Ende  des  Artikels  zeigt,  konnten  auf  diese  Weise 
bislang  vierunddreifiig  Bearbeitungen  des  Morus-Stoffes  fiir  den  genannten 
Zeitraum  nachgewiesen  werden.  Beriicksichtigt  man,  dafi  die  Schriftenver- 
zeichnisse  oder  Spielplane  manch  eines  KoUegiums  unvollstandig  oder  gar 
ganz  verloren  sind,  dann  darf  man  wohl  annehmen,  dafi  die  tatsachliche  Zahl 
der  Bearbeitungen  noch  hoher  anzusetzen  ist.  Uber  die  erwahnten  kurzen 
Eintrage  hinaus,  die  hauptsachlich  zur  Dokumentation  der  Aktivitaten  eines 
Kollegium  dienten,  fanden  sich  in  neunzehn  Fallen  Hinweise  auf  Dramen- 
texte.  In  den  iibrigen  Fallen  mufi  man  wohl  davon  ausgehen,  dafi  keine  Ab- 
schriften  oder  Zusammenfassungen  der  Dramen  angefertigt  wurden.  Soweit 
ich  bis  jetzt  ermitteln  konnte,  sind  nur  vierzehn  Dramen  erhalten.  Die  Stiicke 
von  Roermond,  Courtrai,  Luxembourg,  Luzem  1746  und  Sitten,  von  denen 
nachweislich  Periochae  gedruckt  wurden,  sind  offenbar  nicht  iiberliefert.^^  Nur 
fiinf  Dramen  sind  als  umfangreichere  bzw.  vollstandige  Texte  auf  uns  ge- 
kommen;  als  einziges  gedrucktes  Drama:  Heroica  in  adversis  constaniiaThomae Mori, 
das  1727  im  Kollegium  von  Olmiitz  entstand;^^  als  Handschriften:  das  be- 
reits  besprochene  Stiick  aus  Rom,  eine  ausgeweitete  Perioche  aus  dem  Kol- 
legium von  Mannheim,  die  F.  Droop  1930  in  seiner  Dissertation  vorstellte,^'' 
und  schliefilich  ein  dreifiigseitiges  Stiick  aus  St.  Omer,  das  — wie  McCabe  ge- 
zeigt  hat  — um  die  Mitte  des  17.  Jahrhunderts  in  einen  Duo-Decimo- 
Sammelband  von  Theaterstiicken  iibertragen  wurde,  der  heute  im  Stonyhurst 
College  aufbewahrt  wird.^^ 

In  zwolf  Fallen  beschrankt  sich  unsere  Kenntnis  der  Bearbeitungen  aller- 
dings  lediglich  auf  die  fiir  die  offentlichen  Auffiihrungen  vielfach  gedruckten 
Periochae,  eine  Art  ausfiihrliches  Programm,  das  insbesondere  dem  nicht  La- 
tein  sprechenden  Publikum  das  Verstandnis  der  durchweg  in  Latein  aufgefiihr- 
ten  Stiicke  erleichtern  sollte.^^  Aus  der  Tatsache,  dafi  wir  im  Fall  des 
Miinchener  Jesuitendramas  von  1723  sowohl  eine  Perioche  als  auch  einen 
voUstandigen  Text  besitzen,  kann  man  jedoch  nicht  ableiten,  dafi  auch  in  den 
iibrigen  Fallen  einmal  ausformulierte  Dramen  existiert  haben.  Das  Gegen- 
teil  ist  wohl  wahrscheinlicher,  da  die  Draimen  bei  der  rhetorischen  Schulung 
in  den  hoheren  Klassen  eine  bedeutende  Rolle  spielten.  Die  knappe  Hand- 
lungsskizze  einer  Szene  der  Perioche  wie  z.  B.:  "Episcopus  Roffensis,  dolo  in- 
ductus,  Henrico,  novo  Ecclesiae  Anglicanae  Hierarchae  homagium  dicit.  / 
Nachdem  der  Bishoff  von  Rochester,  durch  List  eingefiihrt,  Henrico,  als  Ober- 


368  THOMAS  MORUS,   TRAGOEDIA 

haupt  der  Englandischen  Kirchen,  die  Huldigung  ablegt."^^  oder  "Henricus 
eodem  Mori  response  offensus,  judicium  fieri  iubet  adversus  Morum.  /  Hen- 
ricus  auf  diese  Antwort  ergrimmet,  befilcht  wider  Morum  Gericht  zu  halten 
und  das  Urteil  zu  fallen, "^^  diente  den  Schiilern  als  Grundlage  fur  eine  weit- 
gehend  freie  Improvisation  von  Dialog  und  szenischer  Handlung.  Die  uns  vor- 
liegenden  Periochae  bestehen  aus  vier  bis  16  Seiten  im  Quartformat  und  sind 
bis  auf  zwei  Ausnahmen  in  Latein  und  Deutsch  erschienen,  die  Stiicke  von 
1631  Ingolstadt  und  1701  Innsbruck  sind  hingegen  ganz  in  Deutsch  bzw.  La- 
tein gehalten.  In  Anlehnung  an  klassische  Vorbilder  enthalten  die  Stiicke  mei- 
stenteils  funf  Akte,  die  von  Prolog  und  Epilog  eingerahmt  und  jeweils  mit  einem 
Chor  verbunden  sind. 

Ein  Vergleich  der  mir  zuganglichen  Stiickel,  widerlegte  meine  urspriing- 
liche  Annahme,  bei  der  Fiille  der  Bearbeitungen  handele  es  sich  lediglich  um 
wiederholte  Auffiihrungen  von  vielleicht  ein  oder  zwei  Originalen,  da  sie  doch 
betrachtliche  Unterschiede  aufweisen.^^  Dessen  ungeachtet  zeigen  die  Stucke 
aber  in  wesentlichen  Elementen  eine  Einheitlichkeit  in  der  Bearbeitung,  die 
sie  zu  einer  relativ  homogenen  Gruppe  zusammenkettet  und  sie  deutlich  von 
den  iibrigen  95  Bearbeitungen  des  Stoffes  abgrenzt. 

Die  Unterschiede  zwischen  den  Dramen  werden  vor  allem  in  der  Zeit-  und 
Handlungsstruktur,  dem  aufieren  Aufbau  und  der  Bildlichkeit  deutlich.  Hier 
konnten  die  meist  anonymen  Autoren  ihren  individuellen  Vorlieben  recht 
grofien  Spielraum  lassen.  So  kann  die  Handlung  bereits  einsetzen,  als  More 
noch  im  Kanzleramt  ist,  oder  — wie  bei  dem  Ellwanger  Thomas  Morus  von 
1712  — erst  als  sich  die  Ereignisse  schon  stark  zugespitzt  haben:  "Cranmerus 
Primas  regni  cum  reliquis  Angliae  et  aulae  Proceribus  Henrico  impium  ho- 
magium  juratus  praestat:  cui  solus  Thomas  Morus  reluctatur.  /  Ein  grofier 
Theil  Englands  pflichtet  dem  Konig  bei  in  seinem  gottlosen  Begehren:  Tho- 
mas Morus  allein  weigert  sich."^^ 

Das  in  den  Quellen  — fast  durchgehend  werden  Sanders  De  Origine  ac  Pro- 
gressu  Schismatis  Anglicanf^  oder  Stapletons  Vita  Thomae  MorP  genannt- 
vorgegebene  faktische  Grundgeriist  der  Handlung  wird  dann  in  aller  Regel 
mit  Szenen  angereichert,  die  im  wesentlichen  ohne  historischen  Bezug  sind 
und  vornehmlich  verdeutlichende,  retardierende  oder  — als  Zugestandnis  an 
den  Publikumsgeschmack  — burlesk-komische  Funktionen  iibernehmen. 

Ein  vergleichbarer  Variantenreichtum  fmdet  sich  bei  der  Gestaltung  der  Pro- 
loge,  Epiloge  und  Chorszenen,  wenngleich  gelegentlich  auch  deutliche  Vor- 
lieben fiir  eine  bestimmte  Bildlichkeit,  z.  B.  der  Vergleich  Mores  mit  einem 
Maulbeerbaum,  der  von  der  Ketzerei  zerstort  wird,^^  zu  konstatieren  sind. 
Bei  den  iiblichen,  vorausdeutenden  Parallelisierungen  des  Schicksals  der 
Hauptfigur  mit  dem  allgemein  bekannter  Personlichkeiten  in  den  Chorszenen, 
fmdet  insbesondere  der  Konflikt  zwischen  Johannes  dem  Taufer  und  Herodes 
gerne  Verwendung:  "Joannis  Baptistae,  incestis  amoribus  Regis  Herodis  re- 
sistentis,  invicta  constantia  Martyrij  Laureola  coronatur.  /  Die  uniiberwind- 


FRIEDRICH-K.    UNTERWEG  369 

liche  Bestandigkeit  des  Heiligen  Johannes  des  Taufers,  welcher  sich  wider 
den  Ehebrecherischen  Konig  Herodes  gesetzt,  wird  mit  dem  Martyrer- 
Kranzlein  gecronet,"^^  heifit  es  im  Chor  des  Dramas  von  1746,  der  Mores 
Hinrichtung  vorausgeht.  Eine  Parallele,  die  eine  Briicke  zu  Buchanans  Bap- 
tista  schlagt  und  wohl  auch  eingesetzt  wurde,  um  indirekt  die  Schuld  Anna 
Boleyns  am  Tode  Mores  hervorheben  zu  konnen.^^ 

Besonders  deudiche  Unterschiede  fmden  sich  naturgemafi  in  der  Anzahl  der 
"dramatis  personae,"  die  in  die  Handlung  einbezogen  werden.  Da  die  meist 
prunkvoUen  Auffuhrungen  nicht  zuletzt  auch  der  Selbstdarstellung  eines  Kollegi- 
ums  und  des  Jesuitenordens  dienten,  versuchte  man  mogUchst  alle  Schiiler  an 
der  Auffiihrung  zu  beteiligen.  Dies  fiihrt  beispielsweise  im  Falle  des  Miinchener 
Dramas  von  1723  dazu,  dafi  zeitweihg  mehr  als  120  Darsteller  die  Biihne  fiillen 
und  immer  wieder  Szenen  eingeflochten  werden,  die  viele  Statisten  erfordern. 

Die  Zahl  der  Hauptfiguren  —  und  damit  komme  ich  zu  den  Gemeinsam- 
keiten  der  Stiicke  — ist  hingegen  vergleichsweise  konstant.  Zu  dieser  Gruppe, 
die  durchgangig  aus  der  Klasse  der  Rhetores  gestellt  wurde,  zahlen  neben  Morus 
und  Heinrich  VIII.  vor  allem  Thomas  Cromwell,  Thomas  Cranmer  und  Tho- 
mas Audley  sowie  die  Grafen  Surrey  und  Norfolk  — und  Anna  Boleyn,  die  al- 
lerdings  nicht  selbst  auftritt,  sondern  aus  dem  Hintergrund  iiber 
Mittelsmanner  intrigiert.  Im  Gegensatz  zu  den  meisten  Dramen  des  19.  und 
20.  Jahrhunderts,  spielen  die  FamiUe  und  der  Freundeskreis  Mores  in  den  Je- 
suitendramen  keine  nennenswerte  Rolle.^^  Dies  liegt  zum  einen  wohl  darin 
begriindet,  dafi  das  Jesuitendrama  weibliche  Rollen  nur  in  Ausnahmefallen 
zuUefi,  zum  anderen  darin,  dafi  ein  Morusbild,  wie  diese  Dramen  es  erkennen 
lassen,  den  Vorstellungen  der  Jesuiten  nicht  entsprach.  Einen  Familienvater, 
der  sich,  in  der  Hoffnung,  dem  Schlimmsten  entgehen  zu  konnen,  schwei- 
gend  zuriickzog,  der,  wie  er  es  in  einem  Brief  an  Margaret  gestand,  grofie 
Angst  vor  korperlichen  Schmerzen  hatte^^  und  deshalb  als  Laie  das  Recht  in 
Anspruch  nahm,  dem  Martyrium  mit  alien  zulassigen  Mitteln  aus  dem  Wege 
zu  gehen,  so  wie  er  es  in  De  Tristitia  beschreibt,^^  konnte  nicht  der  vorbild- 
liche  Held  ihrer  Dramen  sein.  Das  recht  vielseitige  Morus-Bild  des  Booke  of 
Sir  Thomas  Moore,  das  ihn  in  verschiedenen  Episoden  als  geschickten  Anwadt, 
unparteiischen  Richter,  unbestechlichen  Staatsmann,  liebenswerten  und  hu- 
morvollen  Familienvater  und  "the  best  friende  the  poor  ever  had"^^  zeigt,  ist 
hier,  wie  allein  schon  ein  Blick  auf  die  in  unserer  Tabelle  genannten  Dra- 
mentitel  bestatigt,  einem  einseitigen  Morus-Bild  gewichen.  Thomas  Morus  An- 
gliae  Cancellarius  Purpuratus  Verae  Religionis  Defensor  oder  Thomas  Morus  Tragoedia. 
Das  ist  die  bis  in  tod  unueberwindliche  Bestandigkeit  Thomae  Mori  heifit  es  dort,  um 
nur  zwei  Beispiele  zu  nennen.  Eine  Einseitigkeit  der  Darstellung,  die  sich  aus 
der  bei  den  meisten  Jesuitendramen  iibUchen  Charakterisierung  nach  Art  der 
Schwarz-Weifi-Malerei  erklart,  die  keine  Zwischentone  oder  Charakterent- 
wicklung  zulafit.  Die  drei  folgenden  Beispiele  geben  Mores  Darstellung  und 
die  ihm  zugedachte  Rolle  meines  Erachtens  besonders  treffend  wieder: 


370  THOMAS   MORUS,   TRAGOEDIA 

Morus  futurae  tempestatis  praesagus,  animum  adversis  parat,  suoque 
exemplo  trEihit  Fischerum  Episcopum; 

More  riistet  sich  auf  das  bevorstehende  Unwetter  und  macht  mit  sei- 
nem  Beispiel  anderen  Mut.^^ 

Joannes  Mori  filius  Patrem  suum  a  proposito  dimovere  necquidquam 
conatur.  John  kann  seinen  Vater  nicht  von  seinem  Vorhaben  abbrin- 

Thomae  Moro  indicatur  mortis  sententia.  Ad  quam  pie  et  fortiter  obeun- 
dam  se  parat.  Moro  wird  der  Tod  angekiindigt,  er  bereitet  sich  christ- 
Uch  vor  und  geht  freudig  in  den  Tod.^^ 

Das  erste  Zitat  zeigt  ihn  als  entschlossenen  Menschen,  der  anderen  Kraft  spen- 
det,  das  zweite  als  fest  entschlossenen  Christen,  der  nicht  bereit  ist,  seinen 
Glauben  fiir  weltliche  Verganglichkeiten  zu  verraten  und  das  dritte  schliefi- 
lich  als  einen  durch  seinen  Glauben  gestarkten  Christen,  der  fiir  seine  Uber- 
zeugung  bereitwillig  in  den  Tod  geht. 

Die  bereits  genannten  Gegenspieler  Mores  sind  entsprechend  schwarz  ge- 
zeichnet.  Sie  werden  als  hoffnungslose  Sunder  dargestellt,  die  in  starkem  Mafie 
den  Hauptsiinden  verfallen  sind  und  deshalb  mit  alien  ihnen  zur  Verfugung 
stehenden  Mitteln  versuchen.  More  vom  Pfad  der  Tugend  abzubringen.  Dabei 
stehen  immer  wieder  Cromwell,  Cranmer  und  Anna  Boleyn  als  die  eigentlichen 
Widersacher  Mores  im  Vordergrund.  Sie  hintertreiben  aus  Mifigunst  und  Hab- 
gier  jeden  Versuch  Heinrichs,  eine  Einigung  mit  More  herbeizufiihren  oder 
ihm  zumindest  den  Tod  zu  ersparen.  Hierin  zeigt  sich  bereits,  dafi  Hein- 
rich  in  den  meisten  Dramen  nicht  als  der  gottlose  Wiiterich  oder  Tyrann 
prasentiert  wird,  der  er  nach  dem  Titel  oder  Argumentum  zu  sein  scheint. 
Vielmehr  erweist  er  sich  verschiedentlich  selbst  als  Opfer.  Opfer  seines  Stolzes, 
seines  Zornes  und  seiner  WoUust,  aber  auch  Opfer  geschickter  Intrigen  seiner 
falschen,  machtgierigen  Berater,  die  er  zu  spat  durchschaut.^'' 

Fragt  man  abschliefiend  nach  den  Griinden  fiir  das  aufiergewohnliche  Inter- 
esse  der  Jesuiten  am  Morus-Stoff,  so  mufi  man  folgendes  festhalten:  Es  steht 
wohl  aufier  Frage,  dafi  das  Schultheater  im  16.  und  17.  Jahrhundert  eine  be- 
deutsame  kulturelle  Institution  war,  deren  Wirken  insbesondere  unter  den  Je- 
suiten nicht  ohne  Einflufi  blieb.  Sie  benutzten  ihre  Theaterauffiihrungen  nicht 
nur  zur  Steigerung  und  zum  Nachweise  der  Leistungen  ihrer  Schiiler,  son- 
dern  auch  fiir  die  religiose  und  sittliche  Unterweisung  der  Erwachsenen.  Sieht 
man  einm2il  von  der  Moglichkeit  der  unmittelbaren  seelsorgerischen  Betreuung 
ab,  dann  bot  vor  allem  das  Drama  ein  ausgezeichnetes  Mittel,  den  nach  den 
Wirren  der  Reformation  zunehmend  grofier  werdenden  Aufgaben  der  inneren 
Mission  gerecht  zu  werden.  Es  scheint  daher  nur  konsequent,  dafi  sich  die  Je- 
suiten, als  sie  etwa  von  den  dreifiiger  Jahren  des  17.  Jaihrhunderts  an,  die  alten 
biblischen  Stoffe  zugunsten  neuerer  aus  der  jiingsten  Geschichte  zuriickstell- 
ten,     sich     auch     des     Morus-Stoffes     annahmen.     Fiir     ihre     intensiven 


FRIEDRICH-K.    UNTERWEG 


371 


Bemiihungen  um  die  Starkung  der  Katholiken  in  ihrem  Glauben  und  die 
Riickgewinnung  abtriinniger  Seelen  konnte  wohl  kaum  ein  Stoff  geeigneter 
sein,  als  das  Lebenszeugnis  eines  Mannes,  der  den  Tod  auf  sich  nahm,  um 
seinen  Glauben  nicht  zu  verraten,  eines  zudem,  der  mit  angesehen  hatte,  wie 
der  grofite  Teil  des  englischen  Klerus  angesichts  der  Drohungen  Heinrichs 
VIII.  umgekippt  war,  sich  aber  dennoch  in  seiner  Uberzeugung  nicht  beirren 
hefi  und  eines  Mannes  schUefiUch,  der  in  einigen  seiner  Schriften  und  als  Rich- 
ter  selbst  gegen  die  Haretiker  zu  Felde  gezogen  war.  Es  scheint  daher  verstand- 
lich,  dafi  die  Jesuiten  hofften,  sein  Beispiel  mochte  den  Priestern,  die  nach 
ihrer  Ausbildung  in  Rom  nach  England  zuriickkehrten,  Kraft  fiir  ihre  schwere 
Aufgabe  und  die  Erduldung  eines  Martyriums  geben,  hofften,  die  ihnen  an- 
vertrauten  Schiiler  und  ihre  Eltern  mochten  durch  Mores  unerschiitterlichen 
Glauben  selbst  zu  einem  festeren  Glauben  fmden. 

Wir  konnen  heute  nicht  mehr  feststellen,  welche  Wirkung  die  Morus-Dramen 
der  Jesuiten  tatsachlich  hatten.  Die  Haufigkeit  der  Bearbeitung  des  Stoffes  und 
die  Tatsache,  dafi  verschiedene  Stiicke  mehrfach  offenbar  vor  grofiem  Publi- 
kum  aufgefiihrt  wurden,  scheint  mir  aber  dafiir  zu  sprechen,  dafi  sie  vom  Pub- 
likum  mit  grofiem  Interesse  verfolgt  wurden,  so  dafi  vielleicht  auch  hier  eine 
Bemerkung  gilt,  die  ein  unbekannter  Chronist  nach  der  Auffiihrung  eines  an- 
deren  Dramas  wohl  zufrieden  schmunzelnd  niederschrieb:  "utraque  actio  pla- 
cuit  etiam  ipsis  haereticis  quorum  sat  multi  fuerunt  spectatores."^^ 


Liste  der  Jesuitendramen  iiber  Thomas  Morus: 


1612  Rom 

1620  Tournai 

1622  Roermond 

1625  Courtrai 

1628  Schlettstadt 

1631  Ingolstadt 


1647  Bamberg 
c.  1650  St.  Omer 

1656  Luxemburg 

1666  Konstanz 

1666  Steyr 

1666  Luzern 

1680  Emmerich 

1687  Ingolstadt 


Thomas  Morus,   Tragoedia 

La  mart  de  Thomas  Morus 

Tragoedia  Thomas  Morus 

Thomas  Morus,  Cancellier  van  Enghelant 

Thomas  Morus. 

Thomas  Morus,  Das  ist:  Tragoedia  von  Thoma 

Moro  .  .  .   Welcher  vor  96  Jahren  .  .  .  von  dem  Gottlosen 

Wieterich  Henrico  .  .  .  wegen  Verfechtung  wahren  Glaub- 

ens  hingerichtet  worden 

Thomas  Morus,   Tragoedia. 

Morus  sive  Morum  integritas  .  .  . 

Thomas  Morus.   Tragedie 

Thomas  Morus,  Angliae  Cancellarius . 

Thomas  Morus. 

Thomas  Morus  Angliae  cancellarius  pro  authoritate,  im- 

munitate,  veritate  apostolico-romanae  sedis  .  .  . 

Thomas  Morus 

Thomas  Morus  de  vitae  statu  etigendo  deliberans 


MS  46  ff.     erhalten 


Per.  411.2°verloren? 
Per.  4 11.4     verloren 


Per.  911.4   erhalten 


MS 

erhzilten 

1511.12° 

Per.  4 

verloren? 

.0 
pp.  4 

Per.  8 

erhalten 

pp.  4° 

Per.  16 

erhalten 

pp.  4° 

Per.  8 

erhalten 

pp.  4 

372 


THOMAS  MORUS,   TRAGOEDIA 


1688 

Gratz 

1693 

Luxemburg 

1701 

Innsbruck 

1702 

Eichstatt 

1702 

Wien 

1709 

Hildesheim 

1712 

EUwangen 

1713 

Hall 

1718 

Feldkirch 

1721 

Salzburg 

1723 

Miinchen 

1725 

Mannheim 

1727 

Olmutz 

1728 

Molsheim 

1741 

Linz 

1746 

Luzern 

750     Sitten 


1758 
1764 


Ingolstadt 
Konstanz 


Thomas  Morus  Kanzler  von  England 

Thomas  Morus,  martyr. 

Thomas  Mortis.  Ex  Angliae  cancellario  regis  regvm  pur- 

puratus 

Victrix  Constantia  in  Thoma  Moro  Angliae  cancellario. 

Thomas  Morus  Angliae  cancellarius 

Thomas  Morus  mori  quam  impias  Henrici  VIII.  nuptias 

approbare  praeoptans 

Thomas  Morus  Angliae  Cancellarius  Purpuratus  Verae  Re- 

ligionis  Defensor. 

Thomas  Morus  Ein  unbewegliche  Tugend-Saul  und  Hel- 

denmilthiger  Verfechter  der  wahren  Kirchen  in  Engeland. 

Thomas  Morus  Tragoedia 

Thomas  Morus,  ein  Opfer  des  katholischen  Glaubens 

Thomas  Morus.   Tragoedia. 


Thomas  Morus  Angliae  Cancellarius 

Heroica  in  adversis  constantia  Thomae  Mori  .  .  . 

Thomas  Morus 

Thomae  Mori  constantia. 

Thomas  Morus.   Tragoedia.  Das  ist  die  bis  in  tod  unue- 

berwindliche  Bestdndigkeit  Thomae  Mori 

Thomas  Morus.  Grqfikanzler  von  Engelland. 

Constantia  Christiana  Thomae  Mori  .  .  . 
Thomas  Morus.  Canzler  in  Engelland. 


Per.  8  erhalten 

PP  4 

Per.  8  erhalten 

pp.  4 


Per.  7 

erhalten 

pp.  4° 

Per.  8 

erhalten 

pp.  4 

MS  35 

erhalten 

ff.  2° 

Per.  8 

erhalten 

pp.  4° 

MS 

erhalten 

gedr.  Buch  erhalten 


Per. 

8 

verloren? 

pp. 

2° 

Per. 

8 

pp. 

8" 

verloren? 

Per. 

8 

erhalten 

pp. 

4° 

Anmerkungen 


1.  Thomas  Morus.   Tragoedia,  in:  The  Venerabile,  VII,  1934-1936,  94-106. 

2.  MS,  46  fol.  Archives  Lib.  321.  Vgl.  Foley,  94-95. 

3.  Fol.  1 79-21 7v  in  dem  von  Foley  beschriebenen  Folioband.  More  tritt  in  III,  vi 
(fol.  201-2)  kurz  auf.  Bischof  Fisher  ist  vor  allem  in  den  Morus-Dramen  des  17.  und 
friihen  18.  Jahrhunderts  "dramatis  persona." 

4.  Eine  Edition  von  Thomas  Morus  Tragoedia  wird  zur  Zeit  am  Moreanum  des  Ang- 
listischen  Instituts  III  der  Universitat  Diisseldorf  fertiggestellt  und  wird  Ende  1986 
erscheinen. 

5.  Vgl.  Thomas  Morus  Tragoedia,  Rom  1612,  z.B.  fol.  3,  5  und  7v. 

6.  Vgl.  ebd.,  fol.  20v  und  22-22v. 

7.  Vgl.  fol.  23v,  25-26  und  34v. 

8.  So  z.B.  fol.  7v,  9,  12v,  13v,  37v,  38  und  41v. 


FRIEDRICH-K.    UNTERWEG  373 

9.  In  einer  umfangreichen  Untersuchung,  deren  Ergebnisse  in  Kiirze  als  ""Thomas 
Morns  Tragoedia  —  Thomas-Morus-Dramen  vom  Barock  bis  zur  Gegenwart"  veroffent- 
licht  werden,  konnte  ich  rund  130  Dramen  nachweisen,  in  denen  Thomas  Moms  als 
Hauptfigur  auftritt.  Die  Stiicke  sind  in  neun  Sprachen  verfafit  und  stammen  aus  zwolf 
verschiedenen  Landern.  Vgl.  auch  Friedrich-K.  Unterweg,  "Dramatische  Bearbeitun- 
gen  des  Morus-Stoffes,"  in:  Thomas-Morus-Gesellschaft,  Jahrbuch  1981,  hrsg  v.  P.  Ber- 
glar,  H.  Boventer  und  Hubertus  Schulte  Herbriiggen,  Diisseldorf  1981,  129-46. 

10.  London,  1960  u.6.  Das  Stiick  ist  vor  allem  auch  durch  die  Verfilmung  von  Fred 
Zinnemann  weltbekannt  geworden. 

1 1 .  Stellvertretend  fiir  die  umfangreiche  Literatur  zu  diesem  Drama  sei  hier  lediglich 
auf  Ben  Wathen  Black,  The  Book  of  Sir  Thomas  More,  a  critical  edition,  Ann  Arbor,  Michi- 
gan, 1953  und  Scott  Mcmillin,  "The  Book  of  Sir  Thomas  More:  A  Theatrical  View." 
in:  Modern  Philology,  LXVII,  1970,  10-24  verwiesen. 

12.  Thomas  Morus  Tragoedia,  Rom  1612,  fol.  46 v. 

13.  .  .  .  Auctore  Georgio  Buchanano  Scoto,  Londini,  T.  Vautrollerius,  1577.  Vgl. 
auch  James  M.  Aitken,  The  Trial  of  George  Buchanan  before  the  Lisbon  Inquisition,  Edin- 
burgh 1939,  76f.  und  D.  Macmillan,  The  Life  of  George  Buchanan,  Edinburgh  1906,  56, 
103  und  118  ff. 

14.  Wohl  Thomas  More  V.  (1586-1623),  der  von  1601-1610  in  Rom  studierte.  Vgl. 
auch  Foley,  95. 

15.  Carlos  Sommervogel,  Bibliotheque  de  la  Compagnie  de  Jesus,  Briissel  und  Paris 
1896,  gibt  unter  den  Eintragen  zu  den  genannten  Kollegien  jeweils  genaue  Angaben 
zu  den  Periochae,  dennoch  konnten  sie  bisher  nicht  aufgefiinden  werden. 

16.  ".  .  .  magni  quondam  Angliae  Cancellarii,.  .  .  fortitudine  ad  exemplum  Christi 
de  cruce  descendere  renuentis  comprobata,  ac  demum  martyrii  palmis  coronata,"  Ol- 
omucci,  1727. 

17.  Die  handschriftlichenjesuitendramen  des  Collegii Mannheimensis ,  Diss.  Heidelberg  1930. 

18.  Morus  sive  Morum  Tragoedia,  Lat.  MS,  ca.  1650,  (MS. A. VII  50  .1.).  William 
H.  McCabe,  "The  Play-List  of  the  English  College  of  St.  Omers,"  in:  Revue  de  Littera- 
ture  Comparee,  17,  1937,  374.  Eine  von  Friedrich-K.  Unterweg  und  Jiirgen  Beer  her- 
ausgegebene  Transkription  mit  deutscher  Ubersetzung,  Kommentar  und  Einleitung 
erscheint  Mitte  1986  in  der  Reihe  Bibliotheca  Humanistica,  (hrsg.  von  Uwe  Baumann), 
Frankfurt/M.,  Bern,  New  York  1985  ff. 

19.  Vgl.  zur  Auffiihrungspraxis  die  ausgezeichnete  Einfiihrung  in  Elida  Maria  Sza- 
rota.  Das  Jesuitendrama  im  deutschen  Sprachgebiet.  Band  I,  Vita  Humana  und  Transzendenz, 
Munchen  1979. 

20.  Thomas  Morus  Tragaedia,  Luzern  1746,  Pars  I,  Scena  I. 

21.  Thomas  Morus  Angliae  Cancellarius ,  Ellwang  1712,  Pars  Tertia,  Scena  II. 

22.  Vgl.  z.B.  ebd.  und  Thomas  morvs  ex  Angliae  Cancellario  Regis  Regvm  Purpuratus ,  Inns- 
bruck 1701. 

23.  Thomas  Morus,  Ellwang  1712,  Pars  Prima,  Scena  I. 

24.  .  .  .  editus  et  auctus  per  Edvvardum  Rishtonum  .  .  .  Coloniae  Agrippinae,  1585  u.6. 

25.  Vita  Thomae  Mori,  Angliae  quondam  svpremi  cancellarii,  in:  Tres  Thomae,  Douai  1588. 

26.  Thomas  Morus  Tragaedia,  Luzern  1746,  Prologus;  Constantia  Christiana  Thomae  Mori, 
Ingolstadt  1758,  Prologus;  Thomas  Morus  Tragoedia,  Munchen  1723,  Prologus. 

27.  Luzern  1746,  Chorus  II;  vgl.  auch  Thomas  Morus,  Ein  unbewegliche  Tugend-Saul, 
Hall  1713,  Prologus. 

28.  Eine  Interpretation,  die  sich  auch  noch  in  spateren  Dramen  fmdet,  so  z.B.  bei 
Francis  Blackwell,  Blessed  Thomas  More,  London  1931,  54. 


374  THOMAS  MORUS,   TRAGOEDIA 

29.  Als  Kontrastbeispiele  seien  lediglich  Ruth  Bray,  Sir  Thomas  More's  House  at  Chel- 
sea, Kensington  1926  und  Anthony  Merryn,  Death  of  a  Traitor,  London  1947,  erwahnt. 

30.  The  Correspondence  of  Sir  Thomas  More,  ed.  Elizabeth  F.  Rogers,  Princeton  1947,  210. 

31.  D^  Tristitia  Christi,  ed.  Clarence  H.  Miller,  New  Haven  und  London,  1976,  423  ff. 

32.  Black,  Book  of  Sir  Thomas  Moore,  336  (5.1.43). 

33.  Thomas  Morus,  Ellwang  1712,  Pars  Prima,  Scena  IIL 

34.  Ebd.,  Pars  Secunda,  Scena  IIL 

35.  Thomas  Morus,  Hall  1713,  Pars  III,  Scena  VII  et  VIII. 

36.  Vgl.  beispielsweise  Thomas  Morus  Tragaedia,  Luzern  1746,  Argumentum, 

37.  So  im  Thomas  Morus,  Ingolstadt  1631,  Actus  V,  Scena  I. 

38.  KoUegium  Steyr,  Litterae  Annuae  1644  (Cod.  12219/4),  86. 


The  Bucolicon  of  Eobanus  Hessus: 
Three  Versions  of  Pastoral 

Harry  Vredeveld 

The  reader  of  Eobanus  Hessus'  Bucolicon  (Erfurt,  1509)  will  soon,  in 
the  very  first  eclogue,  come  upon  a  passage  which  brings  together 
three  different  and  — to  our  way  of  thinking  — more  or  less  incon- 
gruous versions  of  pastoral.  The  first  is  the  familiar  vision  of  an  Arcadia  where 
shepherds  sing  and  pipe  in  a  locus  amoenus  and  dream  ofotium,  poetry,  and  love. 
We  are  soon  made  to  realize  however  that  this  idyllic  level  is  not  there  for  its 
own  sake,  but  is  in  fact  the  medium  for  an  elaborate  allegory.  On  this  second 
level  the  shepherds  Camillus  and  Paniscus  stand  for  the  poet  himself  and  his 
friend,  Ludwig  Christiani,  the  latter  being  about  to  persuade  the  young  Eob- 
anus to  leave  his  native  Hesse  for  the  Arcadian  fields  of  Erfurt.  However,  as 
Paniscus/Ludwig  praises  the  Erfurt  scene  not  only  for  the  tranquillity  in  which 
poetry  flourishes,  but  also  for  the  sensual  delights  of  its  pleasance  where,  as 
he  says,  full-breasted  Venusses  and  Phyllisses  roam  about  and  sport  with  lusty 
fauns,  Camillus/Eobanus  retorts  sharply:  Hem  quid  mammosa  faciunt  in  phillide 
Fauni?  /  Absint  nequitiae  nostris  ab  ovilibus  omnes.  At  once  we  recognize  that  we 
have  left  the  level  both  of  Arcadian  and  allegorical  pastoral  and  are  now  on 
a  third  — the  Christian-moral  level  popularized  by  the  bestseller  of  the  day,  the 
Eclogues  of  Baptista  Mantuanus,  published  some  ten  years  earlier  in  1498. 
What  shall  we  moderns,  raised  on  Theocritus  and  Vergil,  make  of  this  in- 
congruity? We  expect  our  pastor2ils  to  be  idyllic;  we  will  tolerate  a  degree  of 
allegory  so  long  as  the  shepherd  fiction  helps  us  escape  "the  world  that  is  too 
much  with  us."  But  here,  instead  of  pastorals  of  innocence,  we  are  given  pas- 
torals of  guilt.  Instead  of  a  celebration  of  the  simple  life  with  its  ideals  of  har- 
mony, tranquillity,  joy,  and  love,  we  are  confronted  with  Mantuanesque 
denunciations  of  follies  and  vices.  And  so  we  shake  our  head  in  wonderment 
at  the  poet's  rashness  in  putting  the  new  wine  of  Christian-stoic  moraility  into 
the  old  pagan-epicurean  bottles.  That,  at  any  rate,  was  the  reaction  of  Carl 
Krause,  Eobanus'  nineteenth-century  biographer:  "Dieser  christlich-ascetische 
Zug  passt  wenig  in  die  Naturpoesie  und  stellt  die  modernen  Bukoliker  in  einen 


376  '  THE  BUCOLICON  OF  EOBANUS  HESSUS 

bemerkenswerten  Gegensatz  zu  ihren  alten  Mustern,  welche  von  dem  christ- 
lichen  Dualismus  zwischen  Fleisch  und  Geist  noch  unberiihrt  sind."^ 

Krause's  jaundiced  view  of  Mantuanesque  pastoral  is,  unfortunately,  still 
very  much  current  in  our  own  century,  the  greatest  obstacle  to  understanding 
being  the  stubborn  refusal  to  take  these  pastorals  of  Mantuan  and  his  follow- 
ers for  what  they  in  fact  are:  not  Arcadian  pastorals  burdened  incongruously 
with  Christian  notions  of  folly  and  sin,  but  rather  moral  satires  in  pastoral  guise. 
C.  S.  Lewis'  reasoning  is  typical: 

The  Eclogues  of  Baptista  Mantuanus  .  .  .  mark  the  final  stage  of  a  per- 
version in  the  pastoral  which  had  been  begun  by  Vergil  himself.  In  him 
a  real  imaginative  vision  of  idealized,  yet  not  excessively  idealized,  rus- 
ticity is  ever  present,  but  allegorical  and  even  polemical  elements  play 
a  considerable  part.  These  elements  were  unfortunately  emphasized  till 
in  Mantuan  we  have  the  extraordinary  spectacle  of  a  literary  impulse 
almost  exactly  like  that  of  Juvenal  expressing  itself  through  a  medium 
originally  devised  for  the  purposes  of  refreshment  and  escape.^ 

On  the  same  grounds,  I  suppose,  you  could  condemn  Cervantes  for  pervert- 
ing the  medieval  romances  from  their  original  "purposes  of  refreshment  and 
escape";  or  marvel  at  "the  extraordinary  spectacle"  of  honest  traveller's  tales 
twisted  and  corrupted  by  Swift.  No!  Satire  is  a  wolf  in  sheep's  clothing.  It  de- 
lights in  invading  established  literary  forms  and  genres  and  turning  them  up- 
side down  for  its  own  purposes  of  ironic  attack  and  correction.  Mantuan's  satiric 
pastorals  and  those  of  his  German,  French,  and  English  followers  should,  I 
submit,  be  labelled  not  pastoral  perverted,  but  pastoral  inverted. 

In  Shakespeare's  Love's  Labor's  Lost  (4.2)  the  schoolmaster  Holofernes  cites 
the  opening  line  of  Mantuan's  eclogues  and  exclaims:  "Old  Mantuan,  old  Man- 
tuan, who  understandeth  thee  not,  loves  thee  not."  The  truth  of  this  comment 
has  been  amply  evident  now  for  three  centuries  or  more.  But  how  did  those, 
who  loved  Mantuan  so,  understand  his  eclogues? 

Sixteenth-century  interpretations  of  Mantuan's  and  Mantuanesque  pastor- 
als are  rare.  We  do,  however,  have  hints  from  sympathetic  readers  as  to  how 
they  saw  Mantuan's  place  in  the  development  of  the  genre.  It  is  something 
of  a  commonplace,  for  instance,  that  he  must  be  counted,  along  with  Theocri- 
tus and  Vergil,  as  one  of  the  trinity  that  presides  over  the  pastoral  tradition. 
The  triad  is  mentioned  as  early  as  1503,  in  a  letter  by  Thomas  Wolf  Jr.  to 
Wimpfeling,  and  then  again  in  1509,  in  the  title  poem  of  Eobanus'  Bucolicon. 
English  authors,  too,  place  the  three  poets  together:  Alexander  Barclay,  "E. 
K."  in  the  dedicatory  epistle  to  Spenser's  The  Shepheardes  Calender,  William 
Webbe,  George  Puttenham,  and  Bishop  Hall.^ 

Now  it  is  clear  that  this  triad  always  represented  more  than  a  canon  of  mast- 
ers. Each  also  stood  for  a  level  of  pastoral,  the  one  (from  the  Christian  point 
of  view)  superseded  by  the  next:  1)  literal;  2)  allegorical;  and  3)  moral  or  tropo 


HARRY  VREDEVELD  377 

logical.  Let  us  review  these  levels  briefly  before  we  try  to  use  them  to  under- 
stand what  I  have  earlier  termed  the  three  versions  of  pastoral  in  Eobanus' 
Bticolicon. 

The  first  and  (to  the  medieval  Christian)  lowest  level  is  simple  or  literal  pas- 
toral, exemplified  by  Theocritus.  As  Servius  says,  Theocritus  ubique  simplex  est. 
Boccaccio  too,  like  many  after  him,  would  say  that  Theocritus'  idylls  have  no 
meaning  preter  quod  cortex  ipse  verborum  demonstrate  On  this  level  the  shepherd 
is  shepherd  only,  and  as  such  is  the  emblem  of  the  natural  man  — man,  as  we 
like  to  think,  unspoiled  by  the  city  and  uncorrupted  by  civilization;  but  man 
also,  to  the  Christian  mind,  untutored  and  unredeemed.  Theocritan,  or  idyllic- 
Arcadian  pastoral  was  thus,  to  the  Christian,  ultimately  an  unacceptable  genre. 
One  might  toy  with  it  for  a  while,  but  one  could  not  go  so  far  as  to  celebrate 
the  natural  man  or  his  hedonistic  lifestyle.  Why  then  should  a  Christian  write 
bucolics  at  all? 

Vergil  showed  the  medieval  and  renaissance  writers  a  way  out  — by  using 
the  literal  level  of  pastoral  as  a  carrier  of  allegorical  meaning.  As  Boccaccio 
asserted  (once  again  following  Servius),  Vergil  sub  cortice  nonnullos  abscondit  sen- 
sus.  Or,  as  the  Elizabethan  critic  George  Puttenham  observed:  Allegoriccil  pas- 
toral seeks  not 

to  counterfait  or  represent  the  rusticall  manner  of  loues  and  commun- 
ication: but  vnder  the  vaile  of  homely  persons,  and  in  rude  speeches  to 
insinuate  and  glaunce  at  greater  matters.  .  . ,  which  may  be  perceiued  by 
the  Eglogues  of  Virgill,  in  which  are  treated  by  figure  matters  of  greater 
importance  than  the  loues  of  Titirus  and  Cory  don} 

It  was,  then,  the  technique  of  allegorical  allusion  as  well  as  Vergil's  enor- 
mous prestige  as  a  poet  and  as  a  Christian  before  Christ  that  permitted  —  indeed 
encouraged  — Christians  to  write  pastorals  themselves.  If  Vergil  could  praise 
Julius  Caesar  and  the  Emperor  Augustus,  if  Calpurnius  after  him  could  laud 
Nero,  then  a  Christian  like  Modoinus  could  use  the  form  for  a  panegyric  of 
Charlemagne.  And  the  shepherd  figure,  once  allegorized,  was  immensely  flex- 
ible. He  could  be  made  to  stand  also  for  the  pastors  of  the  church.  Thus  Pe- 
trarch, drawing  on  the  traditional  biblical  imagery,  could  use  the  allegorical 
eclogue  to  attack  the  bad  shepherds  of  Avignon.  Mantuan  too,  in  one  of  his 
late  eclogues,  was  to  attack  the  papal  Curia;  and  his  lead  in  turn  would  be 
followed  by  Spenser  in  the  September  eclogue  and  by  Milton  in  his  "Lycidas." 

When  the  allegorical  eclogue,  as  we  have  seen,  is  employed  for  ecclesiastical 
satire  —  the  attack  on  the  bad  shepherds  of  the  church  —  it  is  evident  that  the 
genre  is  becoming  Christianized.  This  radical  Christianization  of  pastoral, 
begun  by  Petrarch,  was  finally  to  be  accomplished  by  Mantuan,  which  helps 
explain  his  eclogues'  phenomenal  popularity  throughout  the  sixteenth  and  sev- 
enteenth centuries.  It  was  Mantuan's  achievement  to  raise  the  pastoral  fiction 
to  the  Christian  level  by  consistently  endowing  the  shepherd  with  moral  quali- 


378  •  THE  BUCOLICON   OF  EOBANUS  HESSUS 

ties.  To  cite  Puttenham  once  more:  "these  Eglogues  came  after  [Vergil]  to  con- 
taine  and  enforme  morall  discipline,  for  the  amendment  of  mans  behauiour, 
as  be  those  of  Mantuan  and  other  moderne  Poets"  (31).  Pastoral,  in  short,  had 
become  tropological,  the  pastoral  of  the  soul.  It  could  give  examples  of  good 
shepherds  such  as  Faustus  and  Fortunatus  who  strive  to  follow  the  motto  placed 
programmatically  at  the  beginning  of  Mantuan's  first  eclogue:  melior  vigilantia 
somno. 

The  good  shepherd,  Mantuan  suggests,  is  not  the  contemplative  man,  not 
the  Arcadian  dreamer  and  piper,  but  the  active  man  who  watches  over  his  flock 
and  vigilantly  guards  against  the  wolves  that  lurk  nearby;  or,  tropologically 
speaking,  the  Christian  soul  who  guards  his  virtue  and  watches  out  for  the  pas- 
sions that  lurk  in  the  darkness  of  the  heart.  The  bad  shepherd  Amyntas,  by 
contrast,  whose  fate  is  recounted  in  the  second  and  third  eclogues,  shows  how 
not  to  live,  Amyntas,  a  promising  poet,  had  ceased  to  be  vigilant.  Instead  of 
watching  over  his  herd  he  had  gone  fishing— an  emblem  of  love.  Meanwhile 
his  bull  is  being  maddened  by  a  gadfly  and  driven  to  his  death.  Amyntas,  dis- 
covering this  too  late,  literally  —  and  tropologically  —  follows  the  bull  and,  him- 
self maddened  by  the  gadfly  of  love,  is  driven  to  the  forests,  there  to  die  like 
a  beast.  Love,  like  Circe,  turns  men  into  animals.  So  Amyntas  perishes,  un- 
buried  and  unmourned,  carrion  for  the  jackals  and  vultures. 

It  is  a  shockingly  unpastoral  picture.  But  that,  says  Mantuan,  is  where  the 
path  of  the  bad  shepherd  leads  one.  Passionate  love  is  not  a  trifling  matter; 
it  is  (to  use  two  of  his  pay  sages  moralises)  a  flood  and  a  tempest.  The  life  of  Ar- 
cadian illusion,  the  dream  ofotium  and  love,  of  idyllic  simplicity  and  harmony, 
the  ideal  of  the  natural  man  — the  very  substance,  in  short,  of  the  pagan  literal 
pastoral  — is  here  unmasked  for  what  to  the  Christian  it  really  is:  the  broad 
road  to  hell,  at  first  full  of  pleasures,  but  then  a  labyrinth  and  an  abyss. 

The  two  roads  —  the  idyllic-Arcadian  one  and  the  arduous  one  of  virtue  — 
are  exemplified  in  Mantuan's  seventh  eclogue.  The  shepherd  Pollux,  like  Amyn- 
tas before  him,  had  started  out  on  the  road  of  erotic  love  that  always  seems 
so  idyllic  at  the  outset.  But  Pollux,  reclining  under  the  poplar  tree,  sacred  to 
that  ancient  Hercules  of  the  Crossroads,  has  the  good  fortune  of  seeing  a  vi- 
sion of  a  heavenly  Nymph  before  it  is  too  late.  The  Virgin  shows  him  the  two 
roads  of  life.  The  one  is  that  of  Arcadia.  But  once  the  traveller  has  set  foot 
in  this  land  he  is  soon  caught  up  in  its  pitfalls.  He  loses  vigilance  and  reason, 
and  becomes  like  the  beasts  of  the  field. 

Pollux,  of  course,  wakes  up  from  his  dream.  Forsaking  the  Arcadian  path 
of  death  and  damnation,  he  takes  to  the  narrow  path  that  leads  to  salvation. 
That  too  is  where  Mantuan  would  lead  his  readers.  Having  lured  us  into  his 
pastoral  world  where  we  expected  to  find  relief  from  the  guilt  and  the  com- 
plexities of  the  modern  world,  the  Christian  pastoralist  proceeds  to  shock  us 
out  of  our  dreams  and  forces  us  to  awaken  to  the  emptiness  of  the  pagan- 
epicurean  ideal.  For  Mantuanesque  pastorals  are  nothing  less  than  travesties 


HARRY  VREDEVELD  379 

of  the  idyllic  pastorals  we  had  expected,  satiric  inversions  of  the  shepherd  world. 
Here  the  pastor  felix  of  Arcadian  fame  is  replaced  by  the  Christian  ideal  of  the 
pastor  bonus.  It  is  this  very  dashing  of  expectations,  this  radical  Christianiza- 
tion  of  the  genre,  that  made  Mantuan's  Eclogues  first  one  of  the  greatest  of 
the  Neo- Latin  bestsellers  and  finally  one  of  the  most  maligned,  aifter  Europe 
rediscovered  the  charms  of  Theocritus  and  the  Arcadia  of  Vergil.  For  critics 
do  not  take  it  lightly  when  their  expectations  are  disappointed;  and  so  it  hap- 
pened that  inverted  pastoral  became  known  as  pastoral  perverted. 

But  it  is  time  to  turn  our  attention  back  to  the  Bucolicon  of  Eobanus  Hessus. 
Printed  in  1509,  his  work  was  the  first  pastoral  cycle  in  Germany.  Of  his  prim- 
acy in  this  field  Eobanus  was  justifiably  proud.  He  alludes  to  it  several  times 
in  the  Bucolicon  itself  and  repeats  it  often  elsewhere  as  well.  For  all  that,  it  was 
the  work  of  a  very  young  man,  a  21 -year  old,  and  the  mature  Hessus  would 
later  find  there  much  to  criticize  and  correct.  This  reworking,  however,  would 
not  be  undertaken  until  much  later,  in  the  1520s,  after  Eobanus  had  learned 
Greek  and  was  writing  his  monumental  Latin  translation  of  Theocritus'  com- 
plete Idylls.  The  heavily  revised  edition  of  the  Bucolicon,  printed  in  1528,  over 
a  decade  after  the  Reformation,  eliminated  the  last  of  the  originally  eleven 
eclogues  — the  one  in  praise  of  the  Virgin  Mary  — and  cut  up  two  others  to  make 
four  separate  poems.  Thus  the  second  redaction  became  a  collection  of  twelve 
"idylls"  to  which  five  new  ones  were  appended.  Theocritus'  influence  on  the 
revised  edition  is  evident  from  its  new  title  —  Bucolicorum  Idyllia  —  and  is  in  fact 
so  pervasive  that  the  dominant  characteristic  of  the  Bucolicon,  the  adoption  of 
the  three  levels  of  pastoral  into  one  literary  work,  is  largely  and  intentionally 
obscured.  To  study  Eobanus'  use  of  the  three  versions  of  pastoral  we  have  to 
return  to  the  Bucolicon  of  1509. 

The  work,  as  I  mentioned,  is  a  cycle  of  eleven  eclogues.  The  fact  that  there 
are  eleven  is  symptomatic  of  Eobanus'  intentions.  In  his  first  ten  eclogues  he 
would  imitate  Vergil,  but  in  his  last  one,  the  rhapsodic  praise  of  the  Virgin, 
he  would  outdo  both  the  Vergilian  number  and  Vergil's  ethos. 

For  the  most  part,  then,  Eobanus  is  a  Vergilian,  operating  on  the  second 
level  of  pastoral.  Here,  under  the  shepherd-  fiction,  he  recounts  his  life  story  — 
how  he  had  come  from  his  native  Hesse  to  the  university  of  Erfurt,  his  high 
hopes  and  bitter  disappointments,  his  unfulfilled  dreams  of  the  laurel  crown. 
He  lauds  his  friends  in  the  Mutian-circle  and  devotes  an  entire  eclogue  to  the 
praise  of  Mutian's  ideal  of  beata  tranquillitas .  And  he  is  not  beyond  attacking 
his  poetic  rival  Richardus  Sbrulius,  a  Dalmatian  by  birth,  to  whom  he  gives 
the  unflattering  name  Fastus  while  he  himself  rejoices  in  the  Germanic  name 
Mannus. 

Still,  Eobanus  could  not  remain  content  with  being  a  pastorcilist  only  in  the 
imitation  of  Vergil  as  then  understood.  As  Germany's  first  bucolic  poet,  Eob- 
anus seems  to  have  felt  a  strong  urge  to  recapitulate  in  his  own  eclogues  the 
entire  pastorzd  tradition,  from  Theocritus  to  Vergil  and  from  him  to  that  Chris- 


380  •  THE  BUCOLICON   OF  EOBANUS  HESSUS 

tian  Vergil,  Mantuan.  That,  no  doubt,  is  why  the  three  of  them  are  so  pro- 
minently featured  in  the  title  poem  of  his  new  work.  His  bucolics  were  to  be 
an  experiment  in  recreating  the  three  levels  of  pastoral:  not  only  the  standard 
Vergilian-allegorical  version,  but  also  the  Theocritan-literal  level,  where  the 
shepherd  is  a  shepherd  only,  and  the  Mantuanesque-tropological  level,  where 
the  good  shepherd  vigilantly  tends  the  sheep  of  the  soul. 

Eobanus,  of  course,  could  not  at  that  time  read  Greek.  He  knew  his  Theocri- 
tus only  in  the  Latin  translation  of  Martino  Filetico  (Phileticas),  published  in 
the  1460s  or  1470s,  and  then  only  from  the  first  seven  Idylls.  That  he  studied 
this  translation  carefully  can  be  demonstrated  both  by  his  verbal  borrowings 
from  it  and  by  his  use  of  Theocritan  motifs.  Here  is  one  prominent  example: 
in  the  seventh  eclogue  two  rustics  named  Caldus  and  Cautus  are  discussing 
the  relative  merits  of  their  flocks.  The  one,  you  see,  is  a  shepherd,  the  other 
a  goatherd.  As  they  are  lightheartedly  bantering,  Caldus  inadvertently  steps 
on  a  thorn.  Crying  out  in  pain,  he  asks  his  friend  to  pull  the  thorn  out  for 
him.  Cautus  does  so,  but  not  before  commenting  on  how  little  it  takes  to  dis- 
able a  grown  man.  The  episode,  of  course,  is  closely  modelled  on  a  passage 
in  Theocritus'  fourth  Idyll,  the  conversation  of  Korydon  and  Battos  {Id.  4, 
50-57). 

Such  imitation  of  Theocritus  does  not,  in  and  of  itself,  demonstrate  that  Eob- 
anus wanted  to  incorporate  the  literal  level  of  pastoral  into  his  work.  We  need 
to  find  evidence  that  he  in  fact  sustained  this  literal  level,  building  it  up  with- 
out apparent  regard  for  the  other  two  levels.  That  evidence  is  not  hard  to  find. 
Indeed,  much  of  the  seventh  eclogue  in  which  that  piece  of  Theocritus'  idylls 
is  so  clearly  imbedded  is  purely  literal  pastoral.  As  in  Theocritus,  two  herds- 
men talk  about  themselves,  their  flocks,  their  experiences.  There  is  not  a  hint 
of  the  autobiographical  here,  though  it  is  plain  that  our  poet,  himself  a  peas- 
ant's son,  takes  no  small  delight  in  presenting  us  with  an  idyllic  picture  — an 
idyll,  in  its  old  sense  of  a  stylized  little  picture  of  rustic  life. 

Nevertheless,  the  literal  level  of  pastoral  a  la  Theocritus  could  satisfy  Eob- 
anus, Xh^poeta  doctus,  for  only  the  space  of  half  an  eclogue.  For  as  the  two  herds- 
men debate  the  relative  merits  of  goats  and  sheep,  Eobanus  at  last  edges  the 
two  (in  Bruno  Snell's  phrase)  "beyond  their  intellectual  means."  They  begin 
to  aflude  to  ancient  myths,  to  the  goat  of  Amalthea,  a  horn  of  which  became 
a  star,  and  to  the  golden  fleece  of  the  Phrixean  sheep  — the  sign  of  the  Ram. 
At  this,  however,  the  rustics,  remembering  their  humble  station,  come  back 
down  to  earth  and  talk  about  a  subject  more  appropriate  to  them:  love. 

The  subject  par  excellence  of  idyllic- Arcadian  pastoral,  the  theme  of  love  re- 
curs in  the  Bucolicon  too.  However,  as  the  very  names  of  the  herdsmen  in  the 
seventh  eclogue  imply,  love  is  never  introduced  for  its  own  sake,  but  rather 
as  the  object  of  moral  satire.  Eobanus'  work,  like  Mantuan's,  is  at  bottom  anti- 
erotic  and  anti-pastoral.  And  whenever  love  becomes  the  topic  of  conversa- 
tion, our  poet  makes  sure  that  we,  the  readers,  do  not  lose  our  moral  bearings. 


HARRY  VREDEVELD  381 

At  the  end  of  the  seventh  eclogue,  therefore,  the  good  shepherd  Cautus  ad- 
monishes the  passionately  burning  Caldus  to  quench  the  flames  of  profane  love. 
Passion,  he  warns,  is  ephemeral  for  it  is  founded  on  youth  which  perishes  like 
the  rose  or  the  water  bubble;  and  lovers  are  no  more  than  fools  who  die  a  liv- 
ing death. 

Thus,  what  in  the  seventh  eclogue  had  started  out  as  literal  pastoral  adorned 
with  Theocritan  reminiscences,  turns  out  to  be  a  Mantuanesque  inversion  of 
the  pastoral  of  innocence  into  the  pastoral  of  sin  and  guilt,  a  travesty  of  the 
Arcadian  dream.  Like  Mantuan,  Eobanus  aims  to  destroy  the  pagan-epicurean 
ideal;  he  too  wants  to  open  our  eyes  and  shock  us  out  of  our  slumber  and  con- 
front us  with  the  Christian  views  of  life  and  death,  sin  and  evil.  There  can 
be  no  endless  round  of  pleasures,  no  innocent  dreaming  of  idyllic  love:  all  of 
us  are  the  descendants  of  Adam  and  Eve,  fallen  from  the  Garden  of  Eden. 
We  must  earn  our  daily  bread  in  the  sweat  of  our  brow,  for  the  soil  is  cursed 
to  bring  forth  thistles  — and  thorns.  That  is  our  world.  And  if  we,  like  Man- 
tuan's  Amyntas  or  Eobanus'  Caldus,  are  still  caught  up  in  our  Arcadian  fan- 
cies, then  the  Christian  pastoralist  will  do  his  utmost  to  disabuse  us  and  rouse 
us  from  our  dreams. 

On  the  deepest  level,  then,  the  Bucolicon  seeks  to  transcend  both  the  literal 
level  of  a  Theocritus  (as  then  understood)  and  the  allegorical  eclogue  of  a  Ver- 
gil. Eobanus  writes  Mantuanesque,  that  is  to  say,  tropological  pastoral.  And 
when  we  stand  back  from  his  work  and  see  the  cycle  as  it  develops  from  eclogue 
to  eclogue  we  shall  fmd  there  a  shepherd's  progress  from  innocence  through 
guilt  to  redemption.  It  is  Hessus'  own.  In  the  first  eclogue,  as  we  have  seen, 
he  is  Camillus  whose  very  name  implies  that  he  is  an  ingenu,  a  callow  youth 
who  does  not  yet  know  what  it  is  to  be  in  love.  But  already  he  is  being  tempted 
by  another  shepherd,  Paniscus,  to  leave  his  homeland  and  drive  his  flock  to 
the  Arcadian  fields  of  Erfurt  with  its  busty  nymphs  and  lusty  satyrs.  By  eclogue 
three,  Eobanus  (here  called  Cygnus,  after  his  poetic  emblem)  has  arrived  in 
Erfurt  and  is  enjoying  his  otium  on  the  banks  of  the  Gera.  He  has  succumbed 
to  the  temptations  of  Arcadia,  is  given  to  piping  on  the  oaten  flute  and  sport- 
ing with  his  Amaryllis  in  the  shade.  He  is  in  love;  and  in  the  pastoral  debate 
which  occupies  the  first  part  of  the  eclogue  he  defends  passionate  love  and  the 
primacy  of  Vergil,  while  the  wiser  shepherd  Philaegon  defends  reason,  tran- 
quillity of  soul  — and  the  Christian  Vergil,  Mantuan.  As  the  cycle  progresses, 
however,  Hessus  too  waxes  in  years  and  wisdom.  By  the  ninth  eclogue  he  has 
turned  21  and  has  reached  the  years  of  discretion.  Like  Philaegon  in  the  third 
eclogue,  like  Mantuan's  Pollux,  he  now  eschews  passionate  love  as  inutilis  error. 
He  has  attained  the  goal  of  his  shepherd's  progress  and  can  turn  his  back  on 
the  natural  man's  Arcadian  dream.  For  in  the  last  eclogue  — the  eleventh  — he 
transcends  the  Vergilian,  pagan  number,  and  sings  of  love  divine.  Like  Pol- 
lux, Eobanus  reclines  under  a  poplar,  Hercules'  tree.  Having  chosen  the  ar- 
duous path  of  virtue,  he  now  senses  the  presence  of  the  Divine;  the  heavens 


382  *  THE  BUCOLICON  OF  EOBANUS  HESSUS 

open,  and  the  very  goddess  of  goddesses,  the  Virgin  Mary  stands  reve2Jed. 
And  so  he  bursts  forth  in  rustic  song  to  celebrate  her  love  and  pray  for  her 
mercy  and  protection. 

Eobanus'  pastoral  progress  from  pastor  felix  to  pastor  bonus  is  intended  as  an 
example  to  his  readers.  For  as  a  good  shepherd  he  wants  to  lead  his  sheep, 
not  downwards  to  Arcadia,  but  upwards  to  the  meadows  of  heaven,  to  those 
fields  where  the  incongruous  will  cease  to  be  incongruous,  where  — in  the  pro- 
phet's words  —  the  wolf  will  dwell  with  the  lamb  and  the  leopard  shzdl  lie  down 
with  the  kid. 

The  Ohio  State  University,  Columbus 


Notes 


1.  Carl  Krause,  Melius  Eobanus  Hessus,  seinLeben  und  seine  Werke  {Got\\2i,  1879;  Nieuw- 
koop,  1963),  1:85. 

2.  C.  S.  Lewis,  English  Literature  in  the  Sixteenth  Century.  Excluding  Drama,  Oxford  His- 
tory of  English  Literature  (Oxford,  1954),  3:131-32.  See  also  S.  K.  Heninger,  Jr.,  "The 
Renaissance  Perversion  of  Pastoral,"  youma/  of  the  History  of  Ideas,  22  (1961):  254-61; 
and  Simone  Dorangeon,  L'Eglogue  anglaise  de  Spenser  a  Milton,  Etudes  Anglaises,  49  (Paris, 
1974),  pp.  106-10. 

3.  Thomas  Wolfs  comment  is  cited  in  W.  P.  Mustard's  introduction  to  The  Eclogues 
of  BaptistaAiantuanus  (BsdiimorG,  1911),  p.  31,  n.  1.  For  Alexander  Barclay's  discussion 
see  the  "Prologe,"  lines  19-34,  in  The  Eclogues  of  Alexander  Barclay,  ed.  Beatrice  White, 
Early  English  Text  Society,  Original  Series,  No.  175  (London,  1928),  pp.  3-4.  Wil- 
liam Webbe,  in  A  Discourse  of  English  Poetrie,  ed.  G.  Gregory  Smith  in  Elizabethan  Critical 
Essays  (Oxford,  1904),  1:262,  writes:  "The  cheefest  of  these  [pastoralists]  is  Theocritus 
in  Greeke;  next  to  him  ...  is  Virgill  in  Latin.  After  Virgyl  in  like  sort  writ  Titus  Cal- 
phurnius  and  Baptista  Mantuanus."  For  George  Puttenham's  version  of  the  triad  see  his 
The  Arte  of  English  Poesy,  1589,  English  Linguistics  1500-1800,  No.  110  (Menston,  Eng- 
land, 1968),  pp.  30-31;  and  for  Bishop  Hall's  see  his  Satires  (1598),  Book  6.1  (cited  by 
Mustard,  introduction  to  his  edition  of  Mantuan's  Eclogues,  p.  42):  "As  did  whilere 
the  homely  Carmelite,  /  Following  Virgil,  and  he  Theocrite." 

4.  Opere  latine  minori,  ed.  A.  F.  Massera  (Bari,  1928),  p.  216. 

5.  The  Arte  of  English  Poesy,  pp.  30-31. 


Marianische  Liebeskunst: 

Zu  den  Anfangen  der  Lateinischen  Lyrik 

des  Johannes  Bisselius  SJ.  (1601-1682) 

Hermann  Wiegand 

Die  beiden  Lateiner  nehme  ich  mit,  ich  stecke  mitten  darin  in  beiden 
und  sage  jetzt  kein  Wort,  aber  einer  derselben  macht  mich  halb 
narrisch  vor  Vergniigen.  Was  fiir  ein  liebes,  liebes  Tierchen  von 
einem  Buche!"  Mit  dieser  enthusiastischen  Aufierung  bedankt  sich  am  28.  Au- 
gust 1846  Annette  von  Droste-Hiilshoff*  bei  dem  Miinsteraner  Philosophen 
Christoph  Bernhard  Schliiter  fiir  die  Ubersendung  zweier  neulateinischer  Ge- 
dichtbiicher.  Schliiter  hatte  ihr  neben  lacopo  Sannazaros  Fischereklogen  ein 
Exemplar  von  Johannes  Bisselius'  Deliciae  Veris^  ubersandt,  wie  er  schreibt 
"auf  ein  feines,  zierliches  Urteil  hoffend."^  Das  Urteil  der  Droste  mufi  zu 
seiner  Zufriedenheit  ausgefallen  sein,  denn  er  liefi  ihre  Worte  in  sein  Exem- 
plar der  Deliciae  eintragen.*  Die  zitierten  beiden  Briefstellen  sind  nicht  die  ein- 
zigen  Zeugnisse  fiir  die  Beschaftigung  Schluters  und  der  Droste  mit  dem 
barocken  Neulateiner.  In  einem  Brief  an  Wilhelm  Junkmann,  den  spateren 
bekannten  Breslauer  Historiker  (und  Sch wager  Schliiters),  nennt  dieser  neben 
den  Spaniern  Aldana  und  Sailas,  dem  Mittellateiner  lacopone  da  Todi  und  dem 
Neulateiner  Navagero  die  Deliciae  von  Bisselius  unter  Vortrefflichen 
Buchern."^ 

Die  Lektiire  und  begeisterte  Schatzung  des  zu  dieser  Zeit  vollig  verges- 
senen  neulateinischen  Dichters,  Historikers  und  Predigers  steht  im  Zusam- 
menhang  mit  dem  noch  keineswegs  hinreichend  gewiirdigten  Versuch 
Schluters,  wichtige  neulateinische  Dichter  unter  der  Pramisse  christlicher, 
naherhin  katholischer  Gesinnung  als  Teil  einer  christlichen  Weltliteratur  durch 
Ubersetzung  und  Darstellung  wieder  in  das  literarische  Bewufitsein  zu  rufen.^ 
Diesem  Programm  einer  Wiederbelebung  vor  allem  der  lateinischen  Dichter 
der  Gesellschaft  Jesu^  widmet  er  auch  einen  grofieren  Beitrag  zu  der  deut- 
schen  Ausgabe  der  A llgemeinen  Weltgeschichte  des  italienischen  Dichters  und  Ge- 
lehrten  Cesare  Gantu.^  In  ihm  raumt  er  auch  Johannes  Bisselius  einen 
prominenten  Platz  unter  den  fuhrenden  lateinischen  Poeten  der  Gesellschaft 
ein  und  riihmt  ihm  "seltenste  und  originellste  poetische  Schonheiten"  nach. 


384  •  MARIANISCHE  LIEBESKUNST 

Zu  dem  Verhaltnis  der  Droste  zu  Bisselius  tragt  er  nach,  sie  habe  ihn  "hoch 
iiber  alle  neulateinischen  Poeten"  gesetzt^  —  unter  denen  sie  immerhin  Sanna- 
zaro  und  Jakob  Balde  naher  kannte.  Die  Wiirdigung  von  Bisselius  durch 
Schliiter  und  die  Droste  ist  fast  folgenlos  geblieben.  Nur  Bissels  Ordensge- 
nosse  Alexander  Baumgartner  iibernimnit  Schliiters  Charakteristik  fast 
wortlich  in  den  IV.  Band  seiner  Geschichte  der  Weltliteratur ,^^  der  der  christ- 
lichen  lateinischen  und  griechischen  Literatur  bis  ins  XIX.  Jahrhundert  ge- 
widmet  ist.  Aus  anderer,  namlich  regionalliterarisch-bayerischer,  Perspektive 
nennt  Georg  Westermayer  Bisselius  in  seiner  Baldebiographie.^^  Er  stellt  ihn 
als  "einzigen  namhaften  Doppelganger"  neben  Balde.  ^^  Das  kann  nur  wertend 
gemeint  sein,  da  zwischen  Baldes  und  Bisselius'  Dichtung  nur  wenige  Beriih- 
rungspunkte  bestehen.  Er  mag  auch  den  bisher  einzigen  nicht  nur  bibliogra- 
phischen^^  Versuch  einer  Gesamtwiirdigung  von  Bisselius  angeregt  haben, 
der  1916  in  den  Historisch-Politischen  Bldttemfur  das  katholische  Deutschland  ano- 
nym erschien.  Bernhard  Duhr  identifiziert  den  Verfasser  in  seiner  Geschichte 
der  Jesuiten  in  den  Ldndern  deutscher  Zunge^^  als  (Wilhelm)  Kratz,  ebenfalls  einen 
Jesuiten/^  und  iibernimmt  dessen  Ergebnisse  iiber  den  Historiker^^  und  Pre- 
diger'^  Bisselius,  iibergeht  aber  den  Poeten  in  seiner  Charakteristik  der  neu- 
lateinischen Dichter  des  eigenen  Ordens^^  vollig.  Kratz  versucht  erstmals  eine 
wenn  auch  sehr  knappe  Wiirdigung  auch  der  poetischen  Werke  unseres  Au- 
tors.  Er  bezieht  den  1634  in  vierter  Auflage  erschienenen  Cliens  Marianus^^ 
ebenso  ein  wie  die  zusammengehorigen,  1638  und  1644  publizierten  Deliciae 
Veris  und  Deliciae  Aestatis^^  —  tincn  Friihling  und  Sommer  umfassenden  ori- 
ginellen  "annus  sacer  poeticus"  —  nicht  aber  die  1670  erschienenen  beiden  Teile 
der  Antiquitatum  Angelicarum  Tuba  lambicc^^  eine  freie,  jambische  Paraphrase 
solcher  Erzahlungen  des  Alten  und  Neuen  Testamentes,  in  denen  Engel  auf- 
treten.  Zur  Rekonstruktion  von  Bisselius'  Lebenslauf  stiitzt  sich  Kratz  fast 
ausschliefilich  auf  die  Litterae  annuae  der  oberdeutschen  Jesuitenprovinz  im  jet- 
zigen  Bayerischen  Hauptstaatsarchiv,  wahrend  er  kaum  Quellen  aus  den  or- 
denseigenen  Archiven  heranzieht,  wie  ihm  auch  die  wichtige  Verbindung 
Bisselius'  zu  Ferdinand  von  Fiirstenberg,  die  wichtige,  noch  unpublizierte  Briefe 
zeitigte,^^  unbekannt  geblieben  zu  sein  scheint.  Seit  Kratz'  knappem  Einge- 
hen  ist  fur  Bisselius'  Dichtungen  praktisch  nichts  mehr  getan  worden,  wie  ja 
die  lateinische  Jesuitenlyrik  mit  Ausnahme  Baldes  trotz  Schliiters  Vorstofi 
iiberhaupt  kaum  beachtet  wird,  obwohl  Harold  Jantz  und  ihm  folgend  Ha- 
rold C.  Hill^'^  an  der  lateinischen  Bearbeitung  eines  spanischen  Reiseberich- 
tes  Argonauticon  Americanorum  durch  Bisselius  aufwiesen,  dafi  sich  selbst  in  der 
scheinbar  blofien  Bearbeitung  eine  "modern  sensibility"  zeige.  Seither  haben 
nur  Hans  Pornbacher,^^  Andreas  Kraus^^  und  E.  M.  Szarota^'^  knapp  den 
Prosaisten  gewiirdigt.  So  bleibt  angefangen  von  einer  Sammlung  des  ver- 
streuten  biographischen  Materials  bis  zur  eingehenden  literaturwissenschaft- 
lichen  Analyse  der  zahlreichen  Werke  von  Bisselius  noch  alles  zu  tun. 
Ehe  wir  uns  der  Dichtung  zuwenden,  einige  wenige  z.  T.  unbekannte  bio- 


HERMANN  WIEGAND  385 

graphische  Angaben.^^  Der  als  Sohn  des  "teutschen  Schulmeisters"  und  Mes- 
ners  am  20.  August  1601  in  der  graflich-Fuggerschen  Residenz  Babenhausen 
im  heutigen  bayerischen  Schwaben  geborene  Johannes  Bislin,  der  sich  in  seinen 
Schriften  Bisselius  nannte,  konnte  mit  Forderung  der  Herrschaft  —  Taufpatin 
war  eine  Fuggerin  —  nicht  nur  die  Lateinschule  seines  Heimatortes,  sondern 
auch  die  in  voller  Bliite  stehende  Jesuitenuniversitat  Dillingen  beziehen,  an 
der  er  als  dritter  seines  Kurses  1621  den  Magistergrad  erwarb.  Noch  im  gleichen 
Jahr  trat  er  in  das  Noviziat  der  oberdeutschen  Jesuitenprovinz  in  Landsberg 
am  Lech  ein,  Interstitz  und  theologischer  Kurs  folgten  von  1622  an  in 
Miinchen,  Regensburg  und  Ingolstadt.  Seit  seiner  Priesterweihe  1629  in 
Eichstatt  diente  er  seinem  Orden  als  Studienprafekt  an  mehreren  Gymna- 
sien,  als  Kontroverstheologe  an  Hochschulen  sowie  als  Prediger  in  Ingolstadt, 
Regensburg,  Miinchen,  Ebersberg,  Innsbruck,  Dillingen  und  Amberg,  wo  er 
am  9.  Marz  1682  verstarb.  Aus  diesem  auch  regional  begrenzten  Lebenskreis 
fiihrten  ihn  nur  eine  sehr  kurze  Tatigkeit  als  Hofhistoriograph  Kurfurst 
Maximilians  I.  1640  und  ein  wohl  in  das  Jahr  1648  fallender  moglicher  Auf- 
enthalt  bei  Jakob  Masen  in  Koln.^^ 

Neben  seinen  historischen  und  poetischen  Werken  war  unter  den  Zeitge- 
nossen  ein  satirischer  Reisebericht  Icaria  am  beriihmtesten,  der  eine  Ober- 
pfalzreise  im  Jahr  1631  beschreibt.  Er  hat  sehr  wenig— wie  das  oft  dem  Autor 
nachgeschrieben  wird  — mit  Zinzerlings  Itinerarium  Galliae,  sondern  viel  mehr 
mit  John  Barclays  Euphormio  zu  tun,  mit  dem  er  nicht  nur  die  prosimetrische 
Form  und  die  anagrammatische  Verschliisselung  der  Namen  der  Beteiligten 
gemein  hat.^'  Die  Icaria  hat  Franz  Veiras  zu  seiner  Heutelia  angeregt,  und  kein 
Geringerer  als  Christian  Gryphius  wollte  zur  Icaria  einen  Schliissel  verfas- 
sen.^^  Die  bei  Sommervogel  nicht  ganz  vollstandige  Werkliste^^  erganzen 
mehrere  volkssprachliche  Predigtsammlungen  mit  z,  T.  hochst  originellen 
Sujets  — so  der  Geschichte  von  Romeo  und  Julia, ^'^  die  dem  Verfasser 
manchen  Tadel  der  Ordenszensoren  eintrugen. 

Statt  nun  wie  etwa  Kratz  wegen  des  beschrankten  zur  Verfiigung  stehenden 
Raumes  einen  notwendig  oberflachlichen  Uberblick  iiber  alle  Dichtungen  von 
Bisselius  zu  geben,  soil  ein  anderes  Verfahren  einen  Zugang  zu  seiner  Dich- 
tung  ermoglichen:  wir  wollen  versuchen,  das  unerschlossene  Friihwerk  Cliens 
Marianus  von  1634  nach  genus,  Darstellungsform  und  -intention  aus  einem  wich- 
tigen  Aspekt  heraus  zu  charakterisieren.  Dabei  konnen  wir  uns  auf  das  Urteil 
Jakob  Baldes  stiitzen,  der  Bisselius  sehr  geschatzt  hat.  Balde  versteht  in  dem 
selbstverfafiten  Kommentar  zu  seinem  Somnium  de  cursu  historiae  Bavaricae  auch 
den  Bisselius  der  Z)f/t«a^-Sammlungen  wesentlich  als  Mariensanger.^^  Dabei 
stellt  sich  gleich  die  Frage  nach  Bisselius'  Anteil  an  dem  1625  in  erster,  1628 
in  zweiter^^  und  1634  in  vierter  Auflage  erschienenen  Buch.  Noch  Sommer- 
vogel war  im  Zweifel,  ob  das  Werk  als  Ganzes  Bisselius  gehore,^''  nachdem 
bereits  Alegambe^^  behauptet  hatte,  nur  das  erste  Buch  mit  seinen  18  Elegien 
sowie  ein  Elegienkranz  im  Anschlufi  an  das  zweite  Buch  unter  dem  Titel  Theoclia 


386  MARIANISCHE  LIEBESKUNST 

Loyolaea  der  vierten  Auflage  seien  von  unserem  Autor  verfafit.  In  der  Tat  sind 
das  erste  Buch,  die  Widmungselegie  des  zweiten  und  die  Theoclia  allein  gei- 
stiges  Eigentum  des  Bisselius,  wie  auch  er  eines  seiner  Lieblingsbiicher,^^  das 
Epos  De  partu  virginis  Sannazaros,  erst  der  vierten  Auflage  anfiigte.  Eine  ge- 
naue  Lektiire  des  Buches  selbst  hatte  Sommervogel  dariiber  belehren  konnen: 
nach  kurzen  Bemerkungen  in  der  Vorrede  gibt  der  Dichter  in  der  Schlufee- 
legie  des  ersten  Buches  dariiber  genauen  Aufschlufi:  dort  spricht  der  Hetae- 
rophylax,  ein  Schutzengel,  der  ihn  durch  das  ganze  Buch  geleitet,  von  drei 
Dichtern,  die  den  "Urcliens,"  wie  wir  ihn  nennen  wollen,  verfafit  hatten,  zwei 
seien  bereits  verstorben,  einer  noch  am  Leben,  und  als  vierter  soUe  sich  nun 
BisseHus  anschUefien:  ".  .  .  ad  hos  Quartus  tu  quoque,  lane,  veni!.  .  ."  (Cliens 
92,  V.  162).  Die  Stil-  und  Technikanalyse  des  zweiten  Buches  lassen  keinen 
Zweifel  daran,  dafi  diese  Aussage  keine  blofie  Fiktion  ist.  Wer  die  drei  Ver- 
fasser  des  "UrcHens"  waren,  konnte  bisher  nicht  zweifelsfrei  ermitteh  werden. 
Die  Intention  des  ganzen  Buches  wird  schon  an  Johannes  Sadelers  Titel- 
kupfer  deuthch:  das  Spruchband  unter  dem  Bild  der  Gottesmutter,  das  von 
einer  zweigeteilten  Schar  studiosi  gehcdten  wird,  enthalt  den  Beginn  der  "An- 
gelobungsformel  der  Marianischen  Kongregation,""^^  der  Cliens  Marianus  er- 
weist  sich  als  eine  Art  versifiziertes  Handbuch  fiir  jugendliche  Mitglieder  dieses 
wichtigen  gegenreformatorischen  Bundes,  iiber  dessen  Wirksamkeit  an  dieser 
Stelle  natiirlich  nichts  gesagt  werden  kann;  verwiesen  sei  neben  der  mehr  re- 
gistrierenden  alteren  Arbeit  von  Sattler*^  auf  Bernhard  Duhrs'^^  Behandlung 
im  2.  Band  seiner  Jesuitengeschichte  und  die  knappe,  aber  instruktive  von  Karl 
Erlinghagen*^  in  seiner  Erziehungsgeschichte  des  katholischen  Barock.  Im 
Unterschied  zu  Baldes  Kongregationsdichtung**  steht  der  Dienst  des  "cliens" 
=  "sodgJis"  der  Marianischen  Sodalitat  ganz  im  Zentrum  des  von  Bisselius 
herausgegebenen  Bandes.  Der  "Urcliens,"  in  Bisselius'  Ausgabe  das  zweite  Buch, 
gibt  in  sechzehn  Einzelelegien  praecepta  fur  das  sittliche  und  intellektuelle  Ver- 
hcdten  des  jungen  Sodalen,  die  sich  wie  versifizierte  Kapitel  eines  der  iiblichen 
Kongregationshandbiicher  (etwa  Coster  oder  Lechner*^)  ausnehmen.  Als 
Beispiel  sei  der  Titel  der  Elegie  11,5  zitiert,  aus  der  uns  noch  ein  Abschnitt 
beschaftigen  wird:  "Quae  studia  Cliens  Marianus  praeoptet"  —  so  oder  ahnlich 
lauten  alle  Uberschriften.  Als  ein  "proscenium"'^^  zu  diesem  zweiten  Buch  ver- 
steht  Bisselius  seinen  eigenen  Beitrag,  die  achtzehn  Elegien  des  ersten  Buches 
und  die  beiden  Widmungselegien  an  die  jesuitischen  Patrone  der  studierenden 
Jugend,  Aloisius  Gonzaga  und  Stanislaus  Kostka/^  Zumindest  dieses  erste 
Buch  scheint  als  genauere  Adressaten  die  Sodalen  einer  der  beiden  zu  dieser 
Zeit  bestehenden  Miinchner  Kongregationen,  wohl  die  "Congregatio  minor," 
zu  haben.  In  Elegie  14  scheint  namlich  Bisselius  auf  sein  Ebersberger  Tertiat 
anzuspielen  (1632/33),  und  der  Beginn  der  fiinfzehnten  Elegie  bezieht  sich 
auf  die  Riickkehr  nach  Miinchen.  Gegenstand  dieser  Elegie  ist  die  Entste- 
hung  des  Muttergottesbildes,  einer  Assumpta,  von  Christoph  Schwarz*^  in  der 
Aula  des  Miinchner  Jesuitengymnasiums.  In  Aufbau,  Darstellungsform  und 


HERMANN  WIEGAND  387 

Stil  unterscheidet  sich  Bisselius'  eigener  Beitrag  wesentlich  von  dem  seiner 
Vorganger,  die  ihre  Elegien  nur  locker  aneinandergereiht  hatten.  Plan  vol!  ist 
dagegen  der  Aufbau  des  Gedichtbuches  von  Bisselius:  El.  1-3  begriinden  die 
Notwendigkeit,  Mitglied  der  Sodalitas  Mariana  zu  werden,  ausgehend  von  dem 
Gedanken,  dafi  nur  die  Schutzmantelmadonna  (El.  2)  imstande  sei,  den  Kampf 
des  Menschen  gegen  die  Vulnera  animi"  "MUNDUS,"  "CARO"  und  "ORCUS" 
(El.  1)  siegreich  zu  bestehen  und  so  Gottes  Zorn  im  Weltgericht,  das  grandios 
ausgemalt  wird  (El.  3),  zu  entgehen.  El.  4  leitet  iiber  zu  einer  Gruppe,  die 
in  konsequenter  Folge  den  Sodalen  in  militarischer  Terminologie  als  "tiro"  und 
eben  "cliens"  zeigt  (El,  4-11).  Im  Zentrum  steht  hier  das  Gelobnis  des  Ein- 
tretenden  (El.  5).  Dessen  "violatio"  wird  in  Form  und  color  eines  ovidischen 
Heroidenbriefes'^^  von  der  Virgo  Deipara  selbst  am  Beispiel  Udos  von  Mag- 
deburg (EL.  6)^^  als  Verfehlung  mit  furchtbaren  Konsequenzen  gezeigt.  Eine 
Vision  des  Dichters  in  El.  8  wendet  diese  Lehre  ins  Personliche,  wahrend  das 
Triptychon  der  El.  9-11  am  Beispiel  der  Theophiluslegende  die  mogliche  Ret- 
tung  auch  des  gefallenen  Marienbiindners  demonstriert.^^  Die  El.  12-16, 
thematisch  in  grofierer  Nahe  zu  den  praecepta  des  zweiten  Buches,  beschaf- 
tigen  sich  mit  "modi  colendae  Deiparae"  in  den  Formen  von  Gebetsiibungen 
(El.  12)  und  Kasteiungen  (El.  13),^^  sowie  der  Verehrung  "per  imagines"  (El. 
14/15/16).  Der  vor  allem  in  El.  15  und  16  vorbereitete  Preis  der  Schonheit 
der  Virgo  Deipara  gipfelt  in  den  letzten  beiden  Elegien  des  Buches  im  Auf- 
weis  der  Uberlegenheit  dieser  Schonheit  iiber  alle  Natur  (El.  17)  und  mensch- 
liche  Liebe,  in  El.  18  illustriert  durch  die  Vision  des  Ignatius  von  Loyola,  der 
durch  die  Gottesmutter  veranlafit  wird,  von  der  "militia  aulae"  durch  den  "amor 
matris"  zur  "militia  matris"  sich  zu  wenden. 

Die  beiden  letztgenannten  Begriffe  geben  die  alle  Elegien  in  kunstvoller  Ein- 
bettung  durchziehenden  beiden  Leitthemen  des  Gedichtbuches,  die  sich  als 
Einheit  erweisen:  "militia  Deiparae"  als  "amor  Deiparae."  Entspricht  die  Ein- 
kleidung  des  Mariendienstes  in  militdrische  Terminologie  durchaus  der  igna- 
tianischen  Vorstellungswelt,^^  wird  hingegen  in  der  Verkniipfung  dieses 
Motivs  mit  "amor"  ein  Autor  als  Muster  der  imitatio  sichtbar,  der  angesichts 
seiner  Verfemung  als  "spurcorum  lusor  Amorum"^''^  durch  die  jesuitische  Di- 
daktik  wie  Poetik^^  als  Dichter  der  Amores  und  Ars  Amatoria  als  nicht  imita- 
tionsfahig  erschien  und  eine  "editio  ab  omni  obscoenitate  purgata"  in  diesem 
Fall  ja  wohl  kaum  moglich  ist.  Gerade  Bisselius'  Vorganger  im  zweiten  Buch 
des  Cliens  Marianus  hatten  sich  hierzu  eindeutig  ausgesprochen.  In  der  schon 
genannten  fiinften  Elegie  nennen  sie  unter  den  Autoren,  die  von  dem  jungen 
Sodalen  unter  keine  Umstanden  zu  lesen  seien,  neben  CatuU  und  TibuU  vor 
allem  den  Liebesdichter  Ovid: 

Dispereas  Naso,  spurcorum  Lusor  amorum. 

[vgl.  Ovid,  Trist.  IV,  10,1] 
O  Naso,  patrio  quam  bene  pulse  solo! 


388  MARIANISCHE  LIEBESKUNST 

O  bene  Barbaricas  exul  dimissus  in  oras! 

Haec  decuit  lingvam  barbara  terra  tuam. 
Atque  vtinam,  6  vtinam  tecum  scelerata  perisset, 

Cumque  tuis  bustis  Ars  tumulata  foret! 
Non  satis  ingenio  temet  perijsse,  sed  vna, 

Vt  pereant,  alios  te  rapuisse  juvat. 
Vivis  adhuc,  dum  te,  vivunt  monumenta  perempto. 

Vivis  &  hev!  mortes  quot  tua  vita  parit.^^ 

Dagegen  scheut  sich  Bissel  nicht,  Wortschatz,  Zitate,  Stil  und  Anspielungen 
auf  die  Amores  und  Ars  amatoria  in  grofier  Zahl  in  sein  C/iVnj-Buch  einzufiigen, 
ja  diese  imitatio  bestimmt  mit  seine  ganze  Konzeption.  Besonders  deutlich  wird 
dies  in  den  Elegien  drei  und  vier,  die  nach  der  Einleitung  die  eigentliche  "mi- 
litia Mariae"  thematisieren.  In  V.  261-68  der  dritten  Elegie  lesen  wir: 

Vt  sciat,  esse  C LIENS;  opus  est,  opus,  arte  magistra 

Rusticitas  dominae  non  erit  apta  meae. 
Grande  magisterium  est,  Mariana  palatia,  Matris 

Castra,  sequi,  tamen  haec  Castra  Sequenda,  cano. 
Cultori  praecepta  dabo,  praecepta  Sodali: 

Me  lege,  qui  cultor,  quique  Sodalis  eris. 
Successum  vix  Musa  timet;  duce  cantat  Amore: 

Virginis,  ad  versum  hunc,  nos  pius  vrget  Amor. 

Diese  programmatische  Stelle  ist  unzweifelhaft  dem  Beginn  von  Ovids  Ars  ama- 
toria nachgebildet: 

Si  quis  in  hoc  artem  populo  non  novit  amamdi, 

Hoc  legat  et  lecto  carmine  doctus  amet. 
Arte  citae  veloque  rates  remoque  moventur, 

Arte  leves  currus,  arte  regendus  Amor. 

Das  Anfangsdistichon  der  vierten  Elegie  macht  diese  zum  Beginn  einer  Lehr- 
dichtung,  und  der  vierzigste  Vers  derselben  Elegie,  "Signa  habet,  atque  acies, 
nostra  patrona,  suas,"  ist  deutlich  eine  Umformung  des  Anfangsverses  der  in 
unserem  Zusammenhang  wichtigsten  Elegie  do^r  Amores  (1,9),  die  den  Kriegs- 
dienst  des  Liebenden  zum  Thema  hat.  Uberhaupt  ist  diese  Elegie  ganz  durch- 
zogen  von  Termini  der  ovidischen  Liebesdichtung.^^  Aber  nicht  nur  die 
Konzeption  des  ersten  C/z>n^-Buches  als  Lehrgedicht  in  der  Nachfolge  der  ero- 
tischen  Dichtung  Ovids  bestimmt  den  Jesuiten,  er  scheut  sich  auch  nicht,  di- 
rektes  erotisches  Vokabular  zu  iibernehmen.  Im  letzten  Gedicht  wird  die  Nacht 
der  Marienerscheinung  des  Ignatius  so  charakterisiert: 

Quam  rigua  illecebris!  quam  pleno  tracta  voluptas 
Gurgite!  quam  liquido  mersa  Cupido  vado! 


HERMANN  WIEGAND  389 

und  als  Ignatius  von  einer  Flamme  aus  den  Augen  der  "Diva"  getroffen  wird, 
ruft  er  aus:  "lo!  Amo,  Mater  &  Vror!" 

Leider  kann  hier  nicht  detailliert  gezeigt  werden,  wie  gerade  in  dieser  Ele- 
gie  ignatianische  Mystik  durch  ovidische  Liebessprache  iiberformt  wird,  zumal 
interessanterweise  in  einem  Gedicht  der  Deliciae  Aestatis  von  1644,  das  derselben 
Marienerscheinung  gewidmet  ist,  die  Liebe  des  Ignatius  dogmatisch  weniger 
anfechtbar  dem  Gottessohn  selbst  gilt.^  Am  weitesten  wohl  selbst  fiir  das  an 
Hoheliedmystik  ja  gewohnte  barocke  Empfinden^^  wagt  sich  Bisselius  vor, 
wenn  er  die  Entstehung  der  Assumpta  von  Christoph  Schwarz  in  der  Aula  des 
Miinchner  Jesuitengymnasiums  gleichsam  nachvoUzieht:  der  Dichter  gibt  dem 
Maler  Anweisung,  wie  er  das  Bild  gestalten  solle.  Ganz  in  der  Tradition  der 
descriptio  der  einzelnen  Korperteile  der  jungfraulichen  Gottesmutter  ste- 
hend  —Jacobus  Pontanus  war  ihm  unter  den  Jesuitendichtern  vorangegan- 
gen^^  —  wagt  er  sich  in  der  Beschreibung  der  Lippen  weit  dariiber  hinaus  und 
integriert  Elemente  einer  an  Johannes  Secundus  und  seine  imitatores  gemah- 
nenden  Darstellungsweise: 

Perge  tamen:  porroque  Meae  mihi  pinge  Labella 

PRINCIPIS,  Eoae  tincta  rubore  Deae. 
Indiducta  volo,  pressoque  tenacia  nexu; 

Nee  Dens,  nee  pateat  dentis  eburna  Via. 
OSCVLA  sint  tantiam  (non  sint  vasti  ORA  barathri) 

Stent  Labra,  Infantem  stringere  prompta  Deum, 
Basiaque,  a  Tyrio  quamvis  rubicantia  crocco, 

Sint  partim  a  GNATI  Livida  denticulis. 
QVIS  VETET,  e  Puero  sua  carpere  Suavia  Matrem? 

Aut,  Puerum  in  dulci  nectere  Matre  moras? 
Quare,  age,  livorem  Mariano  inspergere  labro. 

Nil  dubita:  &  reliquum  perfice,  Pictor,  opus. 

(£/.I,15,V.89-100) 

Hier  sind  zweifelsohne  Motive  wirksEim,  die  auf  die  Zeitgenossen  Caspar  von 
Barth  oder  Paul  Fleming  verweisen.^*  Gerade  dieses  Gedicht  bietet  die  Mog- 
lichkeit  eines  Motivvergleichs:  das  Schwarzsche  Bild  hat  Jakob  Bailde  in  Ode 
IV,  13  in  einem  "carmen  amoebaeum"  ebenfalls  besungen.  Einen  detaillierten 
Vergleich  miissen  wir  uns  hier  leider  versagen.  Nur  die  entsprechenden  Verse 
45-47  seien  zitiert,  um  die  viel  grofiere  Zuriickhaltung  Baldes  zu  zeigen: 

Certe  non  dubiis  gestit  amoribus 

(scil.  der  Jesusknabe) 
Et  mulcente  labello 
Apricus  trepidat  color. ^^ 

Die  Konzeption,  Ovids  Liebesdichtung,  die  die  jesuitische  Poetik  und  Didak- 
tik  aus  der  Lektiire  zumindest  der  jiingeren  studiosi  ausschliefit,  in  den  Dienst 


39®  MARIANISCHE  LIEBESKUNST 

eines  "castus  amor  Deiparae"  zu  stellen,  um  durch  solcherart  "delectatio"  die 
Sodalen  von  der  weklichen  Liebe  Ovids  ab-  und  der  himmlischen  Liebe  zu- 
zuwenden,  ist  im  Rahmen  der  lateinischen  Dichtungspflege  des  Jesuitenor- 
dens  nicht  singular.  Der  flamische  Jesuit  Nicolaus  Susius  (1572-1619)^^  hatte 
die  erste  seiner  1620  posthum  erschienenen  Elegiae  Marianae,  die  oft  Ovids  Vor- 
bild  als  Folie  haben,  in  Antithese  zu  diesem  iiberschrieben:  "Amores  suos  cas- 
tos  esse"  und  seine  Liebe  deutlich  von  der  Ovids  abgesetzt.  Dessen  Landsmann 
und  Ordensgenosse  Antoine  Deslions  (1589-1648)^'^  hatte  in  zuerst  1631  er- 
schienenen Elegiae  de  cultu  B.  V.  Mariae,  die,  ab  der  zweiten  Auflage  1640  auf 
drei  Biicher  angewachsen,  weite  Verbreitung  fanden,  auch  in  der  Verkniip- 
fung  von  marianischer  Liebeskunst  und  ^mor^^-Rezeption  Bisselius  fraglos  den 
Weg  gewiesen.^^  Beide  hielten  sich  aber,  wie  nach  ihnen  ihr  wieder  dem  Je- 
suitenorden  angehorender  Landsmann  Sidronius  Hosschius  (1596-1669)  (vgl. 
dessen  El.  111,1— eine  Kontrafaktur  zu  Amores  111,1),  in  ihrer  Sprache  vom 
erotischen  Vokabular  weitgehend  zuriick.  Die  Bitte  von  Hosschius'  Elegie  an 
ihren  Dichter,  er  moge  Dichtungen  verfassen,  die  ein  jeder  "salvo  pudore"^^ 
lesen  konne,  impliziert  gerade  den  Verzicht  auf  erotische  Sprache,  die  man 
ohne  Scheu  Gottes  Sohn  gegeniiber  gebrauchen  zu  konnen  meint,^''  nicht 
aber  Maria.  Wenn  Balde  in  Ode  IV,  12  "Amor  Marianus"  das  zentrale  Motiv 
von  Amores  1,2  aufgreift,  das  heimliche  Getroffensein  vom  Pfeil  Amors,  zeigt 
seine  Apostrophierung  der  gottlichen  Geliebten  als  Diana  in  Strophe  drei  ge- 
rade, dafi  er  erotische  Konnotation  ausschliefien  mochte.^^  Bisselius  hinge- 
gen  setzt  diese  bewufit  ein,  um  seine  "domina"  zu  iiberhohen.^^  Die  hohe 
Imaginationskraft  und  der  Farbenreichtum,  mit  dem  er  dies  tut,  rechtfertigt, 
mit  Georg  Engelhardt,  der  ihm  nur  eine  halbe  Zeile  widmet,^^  Bisselius  als 
einzigen,  wenn  auch  mit  Abstand,  neben  den  barocken  Mariensanger  schlech- 
thin,  Jakob  Balde,  zu  stellen. 


Anmerkungen 


1.  Zitiert  nach:  K.  Schulte-Kemminghausen,  Die  Briefe  der  Annette  von  Droste-Hulshoff, 
Bd.  2,  Jena  1944,  Nr.  237,  509. 

2.  J.  Nettesheim,  Schliiter  und  die  Droste,  Dokumente  einer  Freundschaji.  .  .,  Miinster  1956, 
102. 

3.  Ebenda,  102. 

4.  Ebenda,  141. 

5.  J.  Nettesheim,  Christoph  Bernhard  Schliiter  an  Wilhelm  Junkmann,  Briefe  aus  dem  deut- 
schen  Biedermeier  1834-1883,  Munster  1976,  82. 

6.  Vgl.  dazu  vorlaufig  J.  Nettesheim,  Christoph  Bernhard  Schliiter,  Eine  Gestalt  des  deut- 
schen  Biedermeier,  Berlin  1960  (  =  Quellen  und  Forschungen  z.  Sprach-  und  Kulturge- 
schichte  der  germanischen  Volker,  N.F.  5),  99-104;  sowiej.  Galle,  Die  lateinische  Lyrik 
Jacob  Baldes  und  die  Geschichte  ihrer  Ubertragungen,  Munster  1973  (  =  Munster.  Beitr.  z. 


HERMANN  WIEGAND 


391 


dt.  Literaturwissenschaft,  Bd.  6),  53-55.  Galle  ordnet  die  Baldestudien  Schliiters,  der 
auch  Franz  Hipler  zu  seiner  Baldeausgabe  (1856)  anregte,  nicht  in  den  von  uns  skiz- 
zierten  grofieren  Rahmen  ein. 

7 .  Ihr  dient  auch  die  Ubersetzung  einer  Auswahl  aus  den  Pia  Hilaria  des  Angelinas 
Gazaeus,  Miinster  1849. 

8.  Schliiter,  "Lateinische  Poeten  der  Gesellschaft  Jesu,"  in:  C.  Cantu,  Allgemeine  Welt- 
geschichte,  deutsche  Ausgabe,  Bd.  X,  Schaffhausen  1861,  351-71. 

9.  Schluter,  362. 

10.  A.  Baumgartner,  Die  lateinische  und  griechische  Literatur  der  christlichen  Volker,  1.  u. 
2.  Aufl.  Freiburg  i.  Breisgau  (=  ders.,  Geschichte  d.  Wekliteratur,  Bd.  4),  658. 

11.  G.  Westermayer,  ya<;o^Mj  Balde,  sein  Leben  und  seine  Werke,  Miinchen  1868,  59, 
88,  153,  197;  ders.  in:  ADB  2,682. 

12.  Ebenda,  59. 

13.  Historisch-Politische  Blatter fiir  das  katholische  Deutschland,  hrsg.  von  G.  Jochner,  Bd. 
157,  Munchen  1916,  22-23  und  81-93.  Fiir  das  rein  Bibliographische  vgl.  C.  Som- 
mervogel,  Bibliotheque  de  la  Compagnie  de  Jesus,  Briissel-Paris,  T.  I,  1890,  1513  ff. 

14.  B.  Duhr,  Geschichte  der  Jesuiten  in  den  Ldndern  deutscher  Zunge,  Bd.  Ill,  Regensburg 
1921,  566,  Anm.  3. 

15.  Uber  ihn  vgl.  L.  Koch,  Jesuitenlexikon,  Die  Gesellschaft  Jesu  einst  undjetzt,  Fader- 
bom  1934,  216  f. 

16.  Duhr,  ebenda  III,  566.  Vorher  hatte  den  Historiker  schon  gewiirdigt  J.  Bach, 
Jakob  Balde,  Interpretatio  Somnii  de  Cursu  Historiae  Bavaricae,  Regensburg  1904,  XX. 

17.  Duhr,  ebenda  III,  612  f. 

18.  Duhr,  ebenda  III,  578-84  (Adam  Widl,  Christian  Rosacin,  Balde).  Unter  Rosa- 
cins  Oden  (Christiani  Rosacini .  .  .  Poesis  Lyrica.  .  .,  Francofurti,.  .  .  Anno  MDCLXXV.) 
findet  sich  auch  eine  zu  unserem  Thema  gehorige:  Ode  11,37  (p.  268-70):  "Ad  Sodales 
Parthenios." 

19.  Cliens  Marianus  I  Diuersorum  Elegijs  descriptus.  /  Editio  quarta  /  Toto  primo 
libello  auctior.  /  Monachii.  /  Formis  Leyserianis  1634.  /  (Ex.  Eichstatt).  Sommervogel 
Nr.  1. 

20.  Sommervogel  Nr.  5. 

21.  Sommervogel  Nr.  7. 

22.  Sommervogel  Nr.  15. 

23.  Dazu  vgl.  H.  Lahrkamp,  "Ferdinand  von  Fiirstenberg  in  seiner  Bedeutung  fiir 
die  zeitgenossische  Geschichtsschreibung  und  Literatur,"  in:  Westfdlische  Zeitschrift 
101/102,  1953,  301-400,  hier  363  f  mit  Anm.  53  (fehlerhaft!).  Die  Verbindung  war 
schon  Schluter  bekannt,  vgl.  Anm.  5,  dort  103.  Der  Verfasser  mochte  Bissels  Briefe 
edieren. 

24.  H.  Jantz,  "Amerika  im  deutschen  Dichten  und  Denken,"  in:  Deutsche  Philologie 
imAufriss,  hrsg.  von  W.  Stammler,  Berlin  ^1962,  309-72,  hier  317.  H.  C.  Hill,  "Jo- 
hann  Bissels'  ARGONAUTICON  AMERICANORUM  (1647):  A  Reexamination," 
in:  Modern  Language  Notes,  German  Issue  85,  October  1970,  652-62. 

25.  H.  Pornbacher,  "Schwaben.  Die  Dichtung  von  1500-1800,"  in:  Max  Spindler 
(Hrsg.),  Handbuch  der  Bayerischen  Geschichte,  Bd.  3,2,  1156  und  1182;  ders.,  in:  Literatur 
in  Bayerisch  Schwaben.  .  .,  Text  von  H.  Pornbacher,  Weifienhorn  1979  (-  Beitr.  zur 
Landeskunde  von  Schwaben,  Bd.  6),  Nr.  183a  u.  b. 

26.  Vgl.  Handbuch,  (s.  vorige  Anm.),  Bd.  2,  809.  Vgl.  auch  A.  Schmid,  ''Geschichts- 
schreibung am  Hofe  Kurfiirst  Mziximilians,"  in:  Urn  Glauben  und  Reich,  Kurfiirst  Maxi- 
milian L  .  .  .,  Munchen-Zurich  1980  (=  Wittelsbach  u.  Bayern  II/l),  330-40,  hier 
332,  334  und  Anm.  40. 


392  MARIANISCHE  LIEBESKUNST 


27.  E.  M.  Szarota,  "Englische  Geschichte  auf  den  Jesuitenbuhnen,"  in:  D.  H.  Green, 
L.  P.  Johnson,  D.  Wuttke  (Hrsg.),  From  Wolfram  and  Petrarch  to  Goethe  and  Grass,  Studies 
in  Literature  in  Honour  of  Leonard  Forster,  Baden-Baden  1982  (  =  Saecvla  Spiritalia,  Bd. 
5),  489-500,  hier  498  f.  Zu  einem  (nicht  erhaltenen)  Afom^-Drama  von  Bisselius  vgl. 
noch  F.  Radle,  Rez.  zu  J.-M.  Valentin,  "Le  theatre  des  Jesuites.  .  .,"  in:  Literatur- 
wiss.  Jb.  der  Gorresgesellschaft  21,  1980,  387-402,  hier  397. 

28.  Einen  bisher  unbekannten  Brief  von  Bisselius  an  J.  M.  Dilher  verzeichnet  Th. 
Burger,  "Der  Briefwechsel  des  Niirnberger  Theologen  Johann  Michael  Dilher,"  in: 
Chloe  3,  hier  157. 

29.  Der  Verfasser,  der  an  einer  grofieren  Monographie  iiber  Bisselius  arbeitet,  hat 
dem  kath.  Pfarramt  in  Babenhausen,  Herm  OStR  Huber,  ebenda,  und  P.  Hans 
Griinewald,  Miinchen,  fiir  frdl.  Auskiinfte  herzlich  zu  danken. 

30.  Vgl.  Lahrkamp  (s.  Anm.  23),  310. 

31.  Vgl.  Sommervogel  (s.  Anm.  13),  Nr.  17;  Westermeyer  in:  ADB  2,682. 

32.  Westermeyer,  ebenda. 

33.  Die  Dillinger  Bibliothek  besitzt  unter  der  Signatur  VIII, 483, 15  eine  allerdings 
nur8  Seiten  umfassende  Theologia,  ad  disputationem  publicam  proposita.  .  .,  Ingolstadt,  Haen- 
lin  1630. 

34.  Es  handelt  sich  um  die  1667  in  Dillingen  gehaltene  Predigt:  "Romaeus,  und  Ju- 
lietta,  Edlen  Stamms  zu  Verona,"  in:  Mortes  Patheticae  /  oder  /  Anmutige  /  Todt  =  Fa' hi. 
I  Durch  /  R.P.  Joannem  Bisselium,  .  .  .  Getruckt  zu  Dillingen  /  .  .  .  Im  Jcihr  Christi 
1682.,  32-56. 

35.  Jakob  Balde  (s.  Anm.  16),  21. 

36.  Die  Ingolstadter  Ausgabe  von  1625,  die  die  Bayerische  Staatsbibliothek  besafi 
(P.  o.  lat.  604,  P.  o.  lat.  338  ),  ist  nicht  mehr  vorhanden.  Die  ebenfalls  Ingolstadter 
2.  Ausgabe  von  1628  wurde  von  Hauswedell  und  Nolte,  Auktion  228,  Nov.  1978,  Nr. 
978,  angeboten.  Den  jetzigen  Besitzer  konnte  ich  nicht  ermitteln.  Beide  Ausgaben  wie 
auch  die  dritte  Aufl.  habe  ich  sonst  nicht  ermitteln  konnen. 

37.  Sommervogel  (s.  Anm.  13),  Nr.  1. 

38.  Scriptorvm  Societatis  lesv,  / .  .  .  Catalogum  / .  .  .  /  a  /  Philippo  Alegambe  I  ...  I  Ant- 
verpiae  apud  loannem  Mevrsivm.  /  Anno  MDCXLIII.  /  228. 

39.  Vgl.  die  17.  Elegie  des  zweiten  Buches  der  Deliciae  Veris,  deren  3.  Teil  iiber- 
schrieben  ist:  "lacobi  Sannazarij,  Neapolitani  Poetae,  Liber  de  Partu  Virginis,  auctori 
familiaris." 

40.  Der  deutsche  Text  bei  V.  Satder,  Geschichte  der  Marianischen  Kongregationen  in  Bay  em, 
Miinchen  1864,  332. 

41.  Vgl.  vorige  Anm. 

42.  B.  Duhr  (s.  Anm.  14),  Bd.  11,2,  Freiburg  1913,  81-122. 

43.  K.  Erlinghagen,  Katholische  Bildung  im  Barock,  Hannover  1972,  132-42  mit  neu- 
erer  Literatur. 

44.  Dariiber  vgl.  U.  Herzog,  Divina  Poesis,  Studien  zu  Jacob  Baldes  geistlicher  Odendich- 
tung,  Tubingen  1976  (=   Hermaea  N.F.  Bd.  36),  106. 

45.  Vgl.  Duhr  (s.  Anm.  42),  110-14.  Duhr  nennt  weder  den  Cliens  Marianus  noch 
sonstige  poetische  Bearbeitungen. 

46.  Cliens  Marianus  A  2v,  Z.  10. 

47.  Ebenda,  A  4  und  E  5,  jeweils  mit  gegeniibergestellten  Kupfem  Sadelers. 

48.  Vgl.  U.  Thieme  u.  F.  Becker  (Hrsg.),  Allgemeines  Lexikon  der  bildenden  KUnstler.  .  . , 
Bd.  30,  Leipzig  1936,  358-61  (R.  A.  Peltzer),  hier  359. 

49.  Zur  Rezeption  der  Heroiden  Ovids  bei  Jesuiten  vgl.  Heinrich  Dorrie,  Der  heroi- 
sche  Brief,  Bestandsaufnahme,  Geschichte,  Kritik  einer  humanistisch-barocken  Literaturgattung,  Ber- 


HERMANN  WIEGAND 


393 


lin  1968,  381-427,  der  aber  die  fruhen  Texte  (z.B.  Antoine  Deslions  u.  Bisselius)  nicht 
beriicksichtigt. 

50.  Zur  Motivgeschichte  vgl.  Urs  Herzog,  Jakob  Gretsers  "Udo  von  Magdeburg"  1598, 
Edition  und  Monographic,  Berlin  1970  (  =  Quell,  u.  Forsch.  z.  Sprach-u.  Kulturgesch. 
d.  germ.  Volker  N.F.  33),  47-78. 

51.  Zur  Theophiluslegende  auf  der  Jesuitenbiihne  vgl.  F.  Radle,  "Die  'Theophilus'- 
Spiele  von  Miinchen  (1596)  und  Ingolstadt  (1621).  Zu  einer  Edition  friiher  Jesuiten- 
dramen  aus  bayerischen  Handschriften,"  in:  Acta  Conventus  Neo-Latini  Amstelodamensis , 
Miinchen  1979,  886-97. 

52.  Zu  iibcrmafiigen  Kasteiungen  in  diesem  Zusammenhang  vgl.  Duhr,  (s.  Anm. 
14),  Bd.  11,2,101-8. 

53.  Vgl.  z.B.  K.  Biise,  Das Marienbild  in  derdeutschen  Barockdichtung,  Diisseldorf  1955, 
(Diss.  Miinster)  93. 

54.  Das  kann  hier  nicht  naher  ausgefiihrt  werden.  Vorlaufig  Dorrie  (s.  Anm.  49), 
407  U.6. 

55.  Als  Beispiel  nur  Masens  Palaestra  eloquentiae  ligatae,  1661,11,12. 

56.  Cliens  Marianus,  El.  II, 5,V. 75-84. 

57.  Vgl.  z.B.  V.  177  als  Zitat  aus  Ovid,  Amores  I,4,V.39. 

58.  Deliciae  Aestatis  1644,  El.  II,26,V.  183-85. 

59.  Zu  diesem  Bereich  vgl.  vorlaufig  E.  Jacobsen,  Die  Metamorphosen  der  Liebe  und 
Friedrich  Spees  Trutznachtigall ,  Kopenhagen  1954  (  =  Dan.  Hist.  Filol.  Medd.  34,  no.  3). 

60.  In  den  Floridorvm  libriocto  (4.  Aufl.  Ingolstadt  1602).  Dazu  Biise  (s.  Anm.  53),  97. 

61.  Beispiele:  Barth  in:  H.  C.  Schnur,  Lateinische  Gedichte  deutscher  Humanisten,  Stutt- 
gart 1978,  8,  und  Fleming,  Lat.  Gedichte,  hrsg.  von  J.  M.  Lappenberg,  ND  Amster- 
dam 1969,  112  ff. 

62.  Zitiert  nach  B.  Miiller  (Hrsg.),  Jacobi  Balde  Soc.  Jes.  Carmina  Lyrica,  Ratis- 
bonae  ^  1884,  328. 

63.  Benutzt  Nicolai  Svsii  /  e  Societate  lesv  /  Opuscula  litteraria  .  .  .  /  Antverpiae 
.  .  .  MDCXX.,  180  f. 

64.  Benutzt  die  2.  Aufl.  Antonii  Deslions  /  .  .  .  De  cultu  /  B.  V.  Mariae  /  Elegiarum 
/  Libri  tres.  I  Antiverpiae  /  .  .  .  MDCXL. 

65.  So  ging  er  ihm  auch  voraus  in  der  Einfiigung  eines  marianischen  Heroiden- 
briefes  El.  111,5. 

66.  Zitiert:  Sidronii  Hosschii/  .  .  .  Elegiarum  /  libri  sex.  /Antverpiae.  .  .,  MDCLXVII. 
/  76. 

67.  Z.B.  Jacobus  Pontanus  in:  Tyrocinium  Poeticum  I .  .  .  Ingolstadii,  /  .  .  .  Anno  1594, 
El.  11,3. 

68.  Balde  (s.  Anm.  62),  326;  dazu  B.  Hubensteiner,  Vom  Geist  des  Barock,  Miinchen 
^1978,  169. 

69.  In  den  spateren  Gedichtsammlungen  dagegen  orientiert  er  sich  starker  am  Ho- 
helied  Salomons. 

70.  G.  Engelhardt,  "Die  lateinische  lyrische  Mariendichtung  im  deutschen  Sprach- 
raum  von  den  Anfangen  bis  zum  Barock,"  in:  Miinchner  Theologische  Zeitschrift  16,  1965, 
58-88,  hier  87. 


Prose  Apothegms  into  Rime  Royal: 

Thomas  More's  Translation  of 

Pico  della  Mirandola's  "Twelve  Rules" 

Francis  E.  Zapatka 

These  verses  are  written  in  such  appaUing  doggerel  that  it  is  kinder 
not  to  quote  them."  So  wrote  Alistair  Fox^  recently,  of  More's  trans- 
lation of  Giovanni  Pico  della  Mirandula's  ''Regulae  Duodecim  partim 
excitantes  partim  dirigentes  hominem  in  pugna  spirituali,''  which  More  renders  as 
"Twelve  Rules  Partly  Exciting,  Partly  Directing  a  Man  in  Spritual  Battle." 

One  of  the  purposes  of  this  paper  is  to  demonstrate  that  such  an  assessment 
of  More's  translation  is  an  overstatement.  Another  purpose  is  to  demonstrate 
that,  in  a  number  of  instances,  More's  English  verse  is  more  urgent,  more  im- 
perative than  Pico's  original  —  that  is,  More's  verse  at  times,  is  at  least  as  ef- 
fective, rhetorically,  as  is  Pico's  prose. 

More's  translation  or  "paraphrase"  as  some  describe  it^  appeared  "about 
1510"^  but  was  composed,  A.W.  Reed  feels,  "as  early  as  1504-1505"  (18). 
George  B.  Parks  in  his  article  "Pico  della  Mirandola  in  Tudor  Translation" 
even  feels  that  More  "may  have  done  his  verses  as  early  as  1497  or  as  late  as 
1504."* 

From  some  seventy  Latin  prose  lines  More  made  one  hundred  sixty-one  gen- 
erally iambic  English  verses.  These  with  other  comparable  materials,  More 
appended  to  his  prose  translation  and  abridgement  of  a  life  of  Pico,  which  Pico's 
nephew,  Giovanni  Francesco  Mirandola,  published  at  Bologna  in  1496  (Reed, 
18).  Pico  had  originally  appended  his  rules,  it  is  known,  to  one  of  his  letters.^ 
More's  translation  of  this  vita  and  its  appendices  constitute  his  first  printed  work 
in  English.^  Though  it  "was  not  originally  intended  for  publication,"^  "it  was 
published,"  Father  Marc'hadour  has  pointed  out, "at  least  twice  in  More's  life 
time."^  "Translated  as  a  private  devotional  work"^  it  was  dedicated  as  a  New 
Year's  gift  to  More's  "ryght  beloved  syster  in  chryst  Joyeuce  Leygh,"^^  a  Poor 
Clare.  Since  it  was  "written  in  the  vernacular,"  it  belongs,  Judith  Jones  ob- 
serves, "in  a  long  tradition  of  literature  composed  in  English  for  cloistered 
women."*'  Joyce  Lee  was  the  sister  of  More's  good  friend,  Edward  Lee,  who 
was  to  become  the  Archbishop  of  York  (Trapp,  28). 


396  *  MORE's  translation  of  PICO 

Pico  himself,  was  for  the  young  More,  as  Cresacre  More  wrote  in  part,  "a 
singular  layman  .  .  .  famous  for  virtue,  and  most  eminent  of  learning. "^^  More 
probably  became  aware  of  Pico  through  John  Colet  (Trapp,  28). 

More  was  the  first  English^^  translator  of  Pico's  duodecalogue  of  spiritual 
rules  (Parks,  352,365).  The  second  was  also  a  well-known  figure  of  the  Eng- 
lish Renaissance  and  a  friend  of  More's,  Sir  Thomas  Elyot  (Parks,  353).  El- 
yot's  prose  translation  was  dedicated  to  his  own  sister,  was  published  in  1534^* 
and,  as  prose,  is  understandably  closer  to  Pico's  original  than  are  More's  ver- 
ses. John  H.  Major  in  his  book  Sir  Thomas  Elyot  and  Renaisance  Humanism  sum- 
marizes Pico's  rules,  writing  that  they  "consist  of  a  few  simple  admonitions  to 
Christians  to  be  ever  prepared  to  withstand  temptation  by  remembering  the 
blameless  conduct  of  the  Master  and  the  reward  that  awaits  the  faithful  in 
heaven"  (106-7). 

This  study  will  concentrate  on  the  stylistic  differences  which  become  evi- 
dent upon  comparison  of  Pico's  and  More's  texts.  But  before  these  are  con- 
sidered something  should  be  said  about  More's  decision  to  dispose  his  one 
hundred  sixty-one  iambic  verses  into  septets.  This  was  a  decision  he  made  a 
number  of  times  in  his  career  as  poet.  What  he  chose,  specifically,  was  "the  most 
important  fixed  form  of  7  line  stanzas  .  .  .  rime  royaW  calling  for  an  "heroic  qua- 
train and  one  and  a  half  heroic  couplets."*^  Rime  royale  was  his  favorite  form 
(Bridgett,  79)  and  was  a  form  he  could  use  well  (Parks,  365).  He  used  it  for 
other  parts  of  the  appendix  to  this  vita,  for  example,  his  version  of  Pico's  ''De- 
precatoria  ad  Deum," -which  Pico  wrote  in  Latin  Elegiac  verse.  He  used  it  in  his 
original  English  verse,  such  as  his  1503  elegy  on  Queen  Elizabeth.  In  choos- 
ing rime  royale  he  was  in  good  company.  Chaucer,  it  will  be  recalled,  used  it 
for  Troilus  and  Criseyde,  for  example,  and  Shakespeare  used  it  in  the  "Rape  of 
Lucrece." 

The  stylistic  devices  that  will  be  discussed  represent  traditionally  described 
elements  of  style:  imagery,  prosody,  the  figurative.  This  last  element  will  ob- 
serve the  classical  scheme-trope  distinction.  Ezra  Pound's  terms  "phanopoeia, 
melopoeia"  and  "logopoeia,"^^  roughly,  the  visual,  auditory,  and  intellectual 
appeal  of  a  poem  will  also  be  used. 

Without  doubt  Pico's  master  metaphor  and  dominant  image  in  his  rules  is 
military.  Parks,  speaking  about  Pico's  rules  as  well  as  his  "Duodecim  arma  spi- 
ritualis  pugnae"  (Move's  "Twelve  Weapons  of  Spiritual  Battle")  and  the  other  ap- 
pended materials,  writes  that  "Pico  presented  in  these  half  a  dozen  pages  the 
moral  life  of  man  in  the  simplest  terms  as  a  war  against  sin,  for  which  the  con- 
tinuing help  of  a  just  but  loving  God  is  essential"  (353).  He  reminds  us  a  little 
later  that  "the  theme  is  stated  in  a  military  metaphor  of  the  war  against  sin, 
which  Erasmus'  Handbook  of  the  Christian  Soldier  was  soon  to  present  with  much 
greater  range  and  complexity"  (353). 

More  not  only  respects  this  metaphorical  image  pattern,  he  sometimes  con- 
tributes to  it,  and  at  other  times,  variously  intensifies  Pico's  uses  of  it.  In  spiri- 


FRANCIS  E.    ZAPATKA  397 

tual  rule  one,  where  Pico  fights  (^pugnar^)^^  against  flesh,  devil,  and  the  world. 
More  uses  the  substantive  "warre"  (1.2).  Similarly,  in  rule  two,  Pico's  ""pug- 
natuf  becomes  More's  noun,  "battaile"  (2.2).  The  result  in  English  is  variety 
and  a  more  solid  image  than  is  conveyed  by  Pico's  identical  verb  used  twice. 
At  times.  More  intensifies  the  original  by  building  up  Pico's  image  with  mo- 
difiers. In  rule  three,  Pico  contents  himself  with  "caput  nostrum  Christus."  More 
develops  this  into  "Christ  our  lorde  and  soveraine  captayne"  (3.3). 

In  the  second  of  the  5  septets  More  uses  for  the  fifteen  or  so  lines  of  rule 
four,  he  writes,  "as  often  as  thou  dost  warre  and  strive,  /  By  the  resistence  of 
any  sinfull  mocion"  (5.1-2).  In  the  comparable  original  lines,  "resistendo"  is 
the  only  trace  of  the  military  image.  More's  use  of  "warre"  as  verb  in  this  pas- 
sage constitutes  a  polyptotonic  echo  of  "warre"  in  his  rule  one  stanza.  Then 
in  the  fifth  stanza  that  he  uses  for  rule  four,  he  adds  his  own  "resisting  val- 
iauntly"  (8.6)  and  in  the  next  line  "the  fendes  .  .  .  sotle  fiery  darte"  (8.7).  An- 
other addition  is  made  to  the  rule  six  stanza  in  which  appears  "as  a  woode  lion 
the  fende  our  adversarie  [who]  runneth  about,  seking  whom  he  may  devoure." 
(11.3-4).  W.  E.  Campbell,  in  Volume  1  oi More's  English  Works,  glosses  "woode" 
as  "mad"  and  then  refers  to  1  Peter  5:8  (383).  In  Pico  there  is  only  "diabolus 
semper  circuit  quern  devoret."  However,  More's  mad-lion  beast  image,  concurs  with 
the  adversary  image  and  contributes  to  the  phanopoeia  of  the  line,  as  Pound 
might  have  put  it. 

In  another  instance  in  which  More  intensifies  Pico's  military  imagery,  he 
uses  a  figurative  tactic.  Pico,  preaching  constant  readiness  for  the  Devil's  as- 
saults, concludes  his  eighth  rule  with  a  rather  loosely  constructed  anti-metabole 
and  compound  antithesis:  "m  pugna  semper  victoriae,  et  in  victoria  semper  sis  memor 
pugnae.'"  The  "always  be  mindful"  {^semper  sis  memor'').  More  sets  off  in  the  sixth 
line  of  his  septet  and  reserves  the  seventh  line  for  the  exclusive  use  of  the  tight- 
ened "In  victory  battaile,  in  battaile  victorie"  (15.7).  Such  refashioning  also 
provides  a  good  example  of  responsible,  but  ameliorative  verse  translation. 

More  intensifies  Pico's  imagery  using  tropes  as  well  as  schemes.  In  rule  eleven 
Pico  reveals  that  in  the  long  run,  it  is  sweeter  to  conquer  temptation  (''vincere 
tentationem")  than  to  go  to  sin  ("ire  ad peccatum").  More,  however,  takes  the  ab- 
straction ("tentationem")  and  personifies  it  thus:  "...  it  is  more  pleasure  farre, 
/  Over  the  devill  to  be  a  conqueroure  then  is  in  the  use  of  thy  beastly  plea- 
soure"  (18.3-4).  Similarly,  in  the  third  stanza  More  uses  for  this  rule,  he  says 
that  through  "long  experience"  man  knows  what  it  is  "of  his  cruel  enemy  to 
be  overthrowne"  (20.2-3).  For  Pico  the  wording  was  the  inanimate,  abstract 
''cedere  tentationi." 

This  rule  also  provides  another  example  of  More's  use  of  schemes  to  invig- 
orate Pico's  images.  In  the  final  lines  of  the  eleventh  rule  stanzas,  he  uses  a 
double  tricolon.  After  speaking  of  man's  experiential  knowledge  of  defeat  at 
the  hands  of  the  Devil,  he  says  man  should  at  least  once 


398  MORE's  translation   of  PICO 

.  .  .  prove  and  assay  with  manly  defence, 

What  pleasure  there  is,  what  honour  peace  and  rest. 

In  glorious  victory  triumphe  and  conquest.  (20.5-7) 

Wrenched  accent  notwithstanding  this  is  much  more  vibrant  than  ''homo  .  .  . 
deberet  semel  saltern  experiri,  quid  sit  vincere  tentationem.''  Granted,  More  makes  ad- 
ditions here,  but  of  the  six  elements  in  the  tricola:  "honor,  peace,  rest,  victory, 
triumph,  conquest,"  only  "conquest"  is  clearly  recognizable  in  Pico's  ''vincere." 

Finally,  in  rule  twelve,  Pico  writes  that  since  even  St.  Paul  was  in  danger 
of  giving  in  to  pride:  "homo  debet  maxime  se  munire  contra  tentationem  superbiae,  quia 
radix  omnium  malorum  superbia  est.""  More  enlivens  this  with  a  more  vivid  image: 
"well  ought  we  then  our  heartes  fence  and  close,  /  Against  vain  glory.  .  .  ."  Not 
content  with  a  mere  "radix  omnium  malorum  superbia  est,''  he  writes  that "...  vain- 
glory, the  mother  of  reprief  /  [is]  The  very  crop  and  roote  of  al  mischief 
(22.5-7).  Pico's  metaphorical  image  pattern,  then,  becomes  More's  intensified 
metaphorical  image  pattern. 

A  very  prominent  scheme  in  More's  translation  requires  special  attention, 
that  is,  alliteration.  Given  the  accuracy  of  its  occasional  designation  as  "head 
rhyme,"  it  is  at  the  same  time  a  matter  of  prosody.  More's  penchant  for  al- 
literation is  well  known.  Very  recently,  James  Dale  called  attention  to  it  in 
a  paper  on  More's  Richard  IIl}^  In  an  article  on  More's  "Earlier  English 
Works"  W.  A.  G.  Doyle-Davidson  wrote:  "More  is  also  fond  of  alliteration, 
which  occurs  frequently  in  his  verse,  and  which  in  the  prose  of  the  Picus  he 
manages  to  achieve  in  both  its  simple  and  cross  forms  with  a  minimum  de- 
parture from  strict  literal  translation."^^ 

We  hear  it  often  in  the  Rules  as  well.  It  begins  early.  In  rule  two  Pico  writes: 
"in  rebus  mundr\  More  writes:  ".  .  .  in  this  wretched  worldes  besy  wo"  (2.1).  With 
the  help  of  this  very  early  alliterated  phrase  More  achieves  a  kind  of  framing 
effect,  for  in  his  very  last  stanza  he  repeats  this  phrase  almost  identically  when, 
from  Pico's  phrase  "tentationem  superbia^  he  derives:  "...  wretched  worldes  glosse" 
(23.1).  Then  in  his  very  last  line  More  completes  his  alliterative  frame  when 
he  reminds  us  that  death  will  bring  each  of  us  ".  .  .  downe  .  .  .  /  To  vile  carein 
and  wretched  wormes  meate"  (23.6,7).  This  frame  originated  in  Pico's  con- 
tribution to  the  memento  mori  tradition,  the  last  line  of  his  rules,  especially  the 
words  "mors  .  .  .  nos  humiliabit,  ut  simus  esca  vermium." 

Finally,  it  should  be  said  that  this  particular  alliterated  "w"  sound  is  sig- 
nificant in  another  way,  because,  as  we  have  seen  already.  More  speaks  of 
"warre"  in  his  second  line  and  repeats  it  twice  later  in  his  translation.  Thus 
the  phrases  under  consideration  unite  auditorily  with  the  important  war-with- 
sin  image  pattern.  The  result  of  such  echoing  is  coherence,  melopoeic  coherence. 

A  much  more  ambitious  use  of  this  scheme  is  seen  in  the  fourth  stanza  of 
the  fourth  rule.  We  are  advised,  when  tempted  to  anger,  to  think  of  the  pa- 


FRANCIS   E.    ZAPATKA  399 

tiently  suffering  Christ  "Seying  himself  scorned  and  scourged  both,  /  And  as 
a  thefe  betweene  two  theves  threst"  (7.3-4).  These  Hnes  are  particularly  rich, 
since  in  addition  to  using  the  polyptoton  of  "thefe  and  theves"  he  goes  beyond 
simple  consonantal  alliteration,  and  multiplies  consonant  clusters,  "sc"  and  "th": 
"scorn,  scourge,  thefe,  theves,  threst."  Several  possible  sources  for  some  of  these 
sounds  in  the  original,  may  have  been  the  following  words  (which  I  have  sim- 
ply juxtaposed)  from  the  corresponding  passage  in  Pico:  "Se,  conspui,  indigna- 
tionis,  signum,  ostendit,  patientissime,  mansuetissime." 

Turning  more  directly  to  the  prosody  of  More's  translation,  I  would  point 
out  that  More  is  capable,  for  example,  of  a  line  as  crisp  and  regular  as  "and 
here  take  hede  that  he  whom  God  did  love"  (22.1).  The  regularity  is  due,  of 
course,  to  the  five  lambs  — the  crispness,  to  the  monosyllabic  structure  of  each 
of  its  ten  words.  The  corresponding  passage  in  Pico  is  clear,  but  understand- 
ably not  nearly  so  unencumbered  as  More's  line:  "...  in  quo  etiam  homo  debet 
advertere,  quod  Paulus,  qui  erat.  ..." 

A  more  subtle  line,  which  achieves  a  fusion  of  melopoeia  and  logopoeia,  ap- 
pears in  the  eleventh  rule  in  the  prominent  terminal  position  of  the  septet.  After 
explaining  that  "many  men"  rather  than  comparing  the  "joy  of .  .  .  victory"  over 
sin  to  the  pleasure  experienced  in  succumbing  to  it,  compare  this  pleasure  "to 
the  laberous  travaile  of  the  conflict  and  fight"  (19.1,2,7).  First,  the  line  is  hyper- 
metric,  composed  as  it  is,  of  thirteen  syllables.  This  extra  length  reinforces  phys- 
ically and  audibly,  the  concept  "laberous  travaile."  The  sequence  of  "ts"  in 
"travaile,  conflict,  fight,"  also  reinforces  the  concept  through  their  contextu- 
ally  negative  sounds.  In  other  words,  the  length  of  the  line  and  some  of  its 
sounds  make  "laberous  travail"  more  "laberous."  The  origin  of  this  in  Pico  is 
simply:  Sed  comparant  pugnam  voluptati. 

The  final  example  pertains  to  end  rhyme.  Speaking  of  temptation  that  St. 
Paul  experienced,  More  ends  his  first  rime  royal  stanza  of  rule  twelve  with 
the  required  heroic  couplet  thus:  "This  did  almighty  God  of  his  goodness  pro- 
vide, /  To  preserve  his  servant  fro  the  daunger  of  pride"  (21.6.7).  The  end 
rhymes  take  on  added  melopoeia  in  the  fact  that  both  end-rhyme  words  ("pro- 
vide" and  "pride")  are  supplemented  by  the  alliterated  consonant  cluster  "pr". 

In  short,  what  More  has  made  of  Pico's  rules  is  more  than  "appalling  dog- 
gerel." And  to  the  degree  that  More  intensifies  Pico's  rules,  to  that  degree  is 
More's  translation  "as  effective  rhetorically,"  as  the  original. 

The  American  University 


400  MORES  TRANSLATION  OF  PICO 

Notes 


1 .  Alistair  Fox,  Thomas  More:  History  and  Providence  (New  Haven:  Yale  University  Press, 
1982),  p.  35. 

2.  J.  M.  Rigg,  ed.,  Giovanni  Pico  della  Mirandula  (1890;  reprint,  Ann  Arbor:  Uni- 
versity Microfilms,  1978),  p.  89;  Richard  S.  Sylvester,  "A  Part  of  His  Own:  Thomas 
More's  Literary  Personality  in  his  Early  Works,"  Moreana  13-15  (1967):  37. 

3.  A.  W.  Reed,  introduction.  The  English  Works  of  Sir  Thomas  More,  ed.  W.  E.  Camp- 
bell (London:  Eyre  and  Spottiswoode,  1931),  1:18. 

4.  George  B.  Parks,  "Pico  della  Mirandola  in  Tudor  Translation,"  in  Philosophy  and 
Humanism:  Renaissance  Essays  in  Honor  of  Paul  Oskar  Kristeller,  ed.  E.  P.  Mcihoney  (Leiden: 
E.  J.  Brill,  1976),  p.  358. 

5.  T.  E.  Bridgett,  Life  and  Writings  of  Sir  Thomas  More,  2nd  ed.  (London:  Burns  and 
Gates,  1892),  p.  78. 

6.  J.  B.  Trapp  and  Hubertus  Schulte  Herbriiggen, "" The  King's  Good  Servant"" :  Sir  Tho- 
mas More:  1477/8-1535  (IpsWich,  England:  Rowman  and  Litdefield,  1977),  p.  28.  More's 
and  Erasmus'  volume  of  translations  of  Lucian  (from  Greek  to  Latin)  was  published 
in  1506,  however,  and  therefore  would  be  More's  "first  printed  work." 

7.  Stanford  E.  Lehmberg,  "Sir  Thomas  More's  Life  of  Pico  della  Mirandola,"  Studies 
in  the  Renaissance  3  (1956):  70. 

8.  G.  P.  Marc'hadour,  "Thomas  More's  Spirituality,"  in  St.  Thomas  More:  Action  and 
Contemplation,  ed.  Richard  S.  Sylvester  (New  Haven:  Yale  University  Press,  1972),  p.  127. 

9.  Lehmberg,  70. 

10.  R.  W.  Gibson,  comp.,  St.  Thomas  More:  A  Preliminary  Bibliography  of  His  Works 
and  of  Moreana  to  the  Year  1750  (New  Haven:  Yale  University  Press,  1961)  p.  90. 

11.  Judith  P.  Jones,  Thomas  More  (Boston:  Twayne  Publishers,  1979),  p.  43. 

12.  Quoted  by  Trapp  and  Herbriiggen,  p.  28. 

13.  For  French  translations  of  Pico's  Rules  done  close  in  time  to  More's,  see  Parks, 
pp.  354-55. 

14.  John  H.  Major,  Sir  Thomas  Elyot  and  Renaissance  Humanism  (Lincoln,  Nebraska: 
University  of  Nebraska  Press,  1964),  p.  105. 

15.  Paul  Fussell,  Poetic  Meter  and  Poetic  Form,  rev.  ed.  (New  York:  Random  House, 
1979),  p.  145. 

16.  Ezra  Pound,  "How  to  Read"  in  Literary  Essays  of  Ezra  Pound,  ed.  T.  S.  Eliot  (Lon- 
don: Faber  and  Faber,  1960),  p.  25. 

17.  All  quotations  from  Pico's  original  and  More's  translations  are  from  Max  Kull- 
nick,  "Thomas  Morus'  'Picus  Erie  of  Mirandula,' "  Archivfiir  das  Studium  der  neueren  Sprachen 
122  (1908):  35-40.  I  have  also  consulted  a  facsimile  of  Pico's  Latin  text  as  it  appeared 
in  the  1572  Basel  edition  of  his  works:  Joannes  Picus  Mirandulanus,  Opera  Omnia:  tomus 
I  (Torino:  Bottega  d'Erasmo,  1971),  pp.  332-33.  The  Latin  lines  I  have  quoted  in  this 
article  show  no  textual  differences  as  they  appear  in  KuUnick  and  in  the  facsimile,  ex- 
cept for  one  minor  printing  error.  I  have  also  consulted  W.  E.  Campbell's  edition  of 
More's  English  Works  (see  note  3).  The  lines  quoted  from  More's  translation  in  this  ar- 
ticle, as  they  appear  in  Kullnick  and  in  Campbell,  reveal  no  major  differences.  The 
spelling  in  Campbell  is  more  modern  than  it  is  in  Kullnick. 

18.  James  Dale,  "The  Rhetoric  of  Persuasion  in  More's  History  of  Richard  HF  (Paper 
delivered  at  the  Thomas  More/John  Fisher  Jubilee,  London,  17  July  1985). 

19.  W.  A.  G.  Doyle-Davidson,  "The  Earlier  English  Works  of  Sir  Thomas  More" 
in  Essential  Articles  for  the  Study  of  Thomas  More,  ed.  R.  S.  Sylvester  and  G.  P.  Marc'ha- 
dour (Hamden,  Ct.:  Archon,  1977),  p.  367. 


SEMINAR 

Das    Neulateinische    Lehrgedicht 

Leitung:  Heinz  Hofmann 
Einleitung 

Von  den  vielen  Aspekten  des  neulateinischen  Lehrgedichts  —  und  nicht 
nur  des  neulateinischen  — soil  in  diesem  Seminar,  zu  dem  ich  alle 
Anwesenden  herzlich  begriifie,  insbesondere  die  Frage  nach  dem 
Gewicht  und  der  Funktion  der  erzahlenden  und  fiktionalen  Partien  dieser  Lehr- 
gedichte  diskutiert  werden. 

Ausgehend  von  der  Beobachtung,  dafi  sich  vornehmlich  in  den  in  Italien 
entstandenen  Lehrgedichten  des  15.  und  16.  Jahrhunderts  eine  Zunahme  dieser 
narrativen  Abschnitte  feststellen  lafit,  die  sich  in  Vidas  Schachgedicht  sogar  zu 
einer  durchgehenden  mythologisch-fiktionalen  Handlungsstruktur  verdich- 
ten  —  ausgehend  von  dieser  Beobachtung  soil  das  zentrale  Problem  dieses  Se- 
minars von  verschiedenen  historischen  und  systematischen  Ansatzen  her 
thematisiert  werden. 

Zuerst  wird  Herr  Effe  den  antiken  Hintergrund  skizzieren  und  iiber  die 
Funktionen  narrativ-fiktionaler  Digressionen  im  antiken  Lehrgedicht  sprechen. 
Dieser  Beitrag  iiber  die  antiken  Vorgaben  der  neulateinischen  Lehrdichtung 
erschien  mir  als  Ausgangspunkt  fiir  die  Behandlung  der  neulateinischen  Lehr- 
dichtung besonders  wichtig,  weil  sich  von  daher  wichtige  Beobachtungen  iiber 
den  intertextuellen  Zusammenhang  von  lehrhaft-expositorischem  Vortrag  und 
narrativ-interpretierender  Einlage  auch  fiir  die  neulateinischen  Vertreter  der 
Gattung  machen  lassen. 

Anschliefiend  wird  Herr  Akkerman  sich  auf  die  Suche  nach  dem  Lehrge- 
dicht in  einigen  neulateinischen  Poetiken  begeben  und  uns  zusammenfassend 
erlautern,  welche  Rolle  das  Lehrgedicht  in  den  poetologischen  und  sonstigen 
theoretischen  Schriften  von  Boccaccio,  Pontano,  Vida,  Fracastoro  und  dem 
alteren  Scaliger  einnimmt. 

Solchermafien  gewappnet  mit  der  antiken  Praxis  und  der  theoretischen  Dis- 
kussion  der  Humanisten  — wie  ergiebig  immer  sie  auch  ausgefallen  sein  mag— 
konnen  die  abschliefienden  Referate  von  Herrn  Roellenbleck  und  Herrn  Di 
Cesare  einige  Lehrgedichte  des  15.  und  16.  Jahrhunderts  daraufhin  unter- 


402  DAS  NEULATEINISCHE  LEHRGEDICHT 

suchen,  wie  dort  das  Verbal tnis  zwischen  Beschreibung  und  Erzahlung,  zwi- 
schen  Lehre  und  Handlung,  zwischen  Expositorik  und  Fiktion  in  die  poeti- 
sche  Praxis  umgesetzt  worden  ist.  Herr  Roellenbleck  wird  dabei  das  Corpus 
der  neulateinischen  Texte  jenes  Zeitraums  und  jener  Provenienz  mehr  im  all- 
gemeinen  Uberblick  unter  den  genannten  leitenden  Kategorien  befragen  und 
sein  Augenmerk  vornehmlich  auf  die  verschiedenen  Moglichkeiten  legen,  die- 
selbe  Thematik  beschreibend  und  erzahlend  an  den  Leser  zu  iibermitteln. 
Dagegen  wird  Herr  Di  Cesare  am  Beispiel  von  Vidas  Schachgedicht  der  Struk- 
tur  des  Lehrgedichts  als  eines  fiktionalen  Textes  nachgehen  und  versuchen, 
vor  allem  die  Spannung  zwischen  Lehre  und  Fiktion  in  diesem  Text  auch  an- 
hand  der  RezeptionsmogUchkeiten  durch  jeweils  verschieden  gestimmte  und 
interessierte  Lesergruppen  anzudeuten. 

Diese  verschiedenen  Ansatze,  die  Berechtigung  der  verwendeten  Begrifflich- 
keit  und  die  bereits  jetzt  zu  prognostizierende  Verschiedenheit  der  Standpunkte 
und  Resultate  werden  dann,  so  hoffen  wir,  zu  einer  anregenden  und  in  manchen 
Punkten  auch  erhellenden  und  klarenden  Diskussion  unter  alien  Seminarteil- 
nehmern  fiihren. 

Lassen  Sie  mich  noch  eine  letzte  einleitende  Bemerkung  machen:  Urspriing- 
lich  hatte  mir  auch  Herr  Konrad  Krautter  zugesagt,  sich  mit  einem  kurzen 
Referat  iiber  die  Aspekte  der  Lesererwartungen  und  der  historischen  Publi- 
kumsstruktur  und  dessen  bildungs-  und  sozialisationsgeschichtlichen  Voraus- 
setzungen  an  diesem  Seminar  zu  beteiligen.  Sie  alle  wissen,  dafi  ihn  eine  mors 
immatura  ereilt  hat:  cecidit  ante  diem.  Ich  glaube,  es  ist  auch  in  Ihrem  Sinn,  wenn 
wir  dieses  Seminar  dem  Andenken  an  Konrad  Krautter  widmen. 


Die  Funktionen  narrativ-fiktionaler 
Digressionen  im  antiken  Lehrgedicht 

Bernd  Effe 

Das  antike  Lehrgedicht  steht  seit  der  durch  Arat  vollzogenen 
kiinsdichen  Wiederbelebung  der  zwischenzeidich  langst  obsolet 
gewordenen  hesiodeisch-lehrhaften  Poesie  als  Uterarisches  Genre  in 
einem  doppelten  SpannungsverhaUnis:  einmal  zur  "eigendichen,"  d.h. 
mimetisch-fiktionalen,  Dichtung  (insbesondere  zum  Epos)  und  zum  anderen 
zur  wissenschafdichen  Fachprosa  als  dem  an  sich  "zustandigen"  Medium  der 
Vermitdung  systematisierten  Sachwissens.  Der  aus  dem  mimetischen  Defizit 
resultierende  prekare  poetologische  Status  der  Gattung  ist  zuerst  in  aller 
Scharfe  von  Aristoteles  moniert  worden:  Indem  er  die  [XifXTjai?  (anstelle  der 
metrischen  Form)  zum  zentralen  Kriterium  der  Dichtung  erklart,  verweist  er 
die  Lehrepik  eines  Empedokles  aus  dem  Bereich  der  Poesie  {Poetik  1447  b  17 
ff.)  — und  wirft  damit  fiir  die  Gattung  insgesamt  ein  Problem  auf,  das  sich- 
erlich  alien  spateren  Lehrdichtern  der  Antike  mehr  oder  weniger  bewufit  gewe- 
sen  ist,  mogen  sie  auch  — im  Gegensatz  zu  Aristoteles  —  traditionellerweise  in 
der  metrischen  Form  das  spezifische  Kriterium  der  Dichtung  erblickt  haben. 
Eine  Moglichkeit,  dem  poetischen  Defizit  der  Gattung  gegenzusteuern,  sahen 
die  Lehrdichter  von  Anfang  2in  darin,  die  Entfaltung  des  zumeist  sehr  trocke- 
nen  Wissensstoffes  durch  Digressionen  aufzulockern;  der  poesieferne  Stoff 
wurde  so  der  Dichtung  wenigstens  streckenweise  angenahert.  Die  Einfiigung 
von  Exkursen  gait  — nach  dem  Vorbild  von  Hesiods  ^r^a  —  geradezu  als  ein 
konstitutives  Element  der  Gattung,^  Die  Digressionen  konnen  selbstverstand- 
lich  von  verschiedener  Prasentationsart  und  Form  sein  (Vergleiche,  Analo- 
gien,  Gleichnisse;  kurze  Abschweifungen;  Hinweise  auf  Erfahrungen  des 
Autors;  ausgedehnte,  sich  verselbstandigende  Exkurse;  deskriptiv  oder  nar- 
rativ)  und  inhaltlich  sehr  unterschiedlichen  Bereichen  entstammen.  Was  den 
letztgenannten  Aspekt  betrifft,  so  nimmt  allerdings  die  (oft  genug  fiktional  an- 
gereicherte)  Mythenerzahlung  (mit  ihrer  Verlangerung  bis  in  den  Bereich  hi- 
storischen  Geschehens)  einen  eindeutig  dominanten  Rang  ein.  Deshalb  mochte 
ich  mich  im  folgenden  auf  sie  konzentrieren  und  in  der  gebotenen  Kiirze  her- 


404  DIGRESSIONEN   IM  ANTIKEN   LEHRGEDICHT 

ausarbeiten,  in  welcher  Weise  und  mit  welcher  Funktionalisierung  sich  das 
antike  Lehrgedicht  dieses  narrativ-fiktionalen  Elements  der  Poetisierung  be- 
dient  hat. 

Hier  mufi  ich  nun  sogleich  auf  einen  Sachverhalt  hinweisen,  der  gerade 
auch  fiir  die  Erorterung  der  Exkurstechnik  von  fund2imentaler  Bedeutung  ist. 
Die  Funktion  der  Exkurse  (und  natiirlich  auch  die  Quantitat  ihres  Vorkom- 
mens)  hangt  wesentUch  ab  von  der  jeweiligen  Haltung  des  Lehrdichters  sei- 
nem  Stoff  gegeniiber.  Diese  wiederum  lafit  sich  folgenden  drei  Grundtypen 
(bzw.  gegebenenfalls  ihren  Mischungen)  zuordnen:^  dem  "sachbezogenen" 
(echtes  Interesse  des  Autors  am  Gegenstand  als  solchen  und  seiner  didakti- 
schen  Vermittlung;  gegeniiber  dem  Sachengagement  hat  die  Poesie  eine  se- 
kundare,  dienende  Funktion^),  dem  "formalen"  (kein  eigentliches  Interesse 
des  Dichters  am  Gegenstand;  die  didaktische  Absicht  ist  im  wesendichen  fiktiv; 
es  geht  dem  Autor  primar  um  die  formale  Leistung  der  Poetisierung  eines  sper- 
rigen  Stoffes)  und  dem  "transparenten"  Typ  (der  lehrhaft  entfaltete  Stoff  ist 
transparent  fiir  ein  ihn  iiberlagerndes,  eigentliches  Thema;  um  dieses,  nicht 
um  den  Stoff,  geht  es  dem  Autor,  auf  dieses  richtet  sich  seine  eigentliche  di- 
daktische Absicht).  In  welchem  Mafie  die  Verwendung  und  Funktionalisie- 
rung von  Digressionen  durch  die  jeweilige  Haltung  des  Dichters  seinem 
Gegenstand  gegeniiber  bedingt  ist,  lafit  sich  beispielhaft  anhand  der  sum- 
marischen*  Betrachtung  dreier  Lehrgedichte  demonstrieren,  die  je  einen  der 
genannten  Typen  rein  verkorpern:  derjenigen  des  Lukrez,  Nikander  und  Arat. 

Die  streng  sachbezogene  Einstellung  des  Lukrez  — ihm  geht  es  darum,  seine 
Leser  mit  der  epikureischen  Heilslehre  von  den  beiden  Hauptgefahrdungen 
der  Seelenruhe  zu  befreien:  der  Gotterfurcht  und  der  Todesangst  — hat  zur 
Folge,  dafi  dieser  von  der  Bedeutsamkeit  seines  Stoffes  zutiefst  durchdrungene 
Lehrdichterauf  mythologische  Digressionen  als  sachfremde  Zutaten  so  gut  wie 
ganz  verzichtet.  Die  beiden  Ausnahmen  bestatigen  die  Regel.  Der  Venus- 
Hymnus  des  Proomiums  fiihrt  dem  Leser  anhand  der  narrativen  Anreiche- 
rung^  der  Metonymie  Venus  =  voluptas  I  tiSovt)  gleich  zu  Beginn  ein  Grund- 
element  der  epikureischen  Lehre  eindrucksvoll  vbr  Augen:  die  universale 
Wirksamkeit  des  Lustprinzips;  und  der  Magna  mater-Exkurs  (2,  600  ff.)  dient 
der  Demonstration,  dafi  die  Beseitigung  der  religio  nur  auf  dem  Wege  einer 
natiirlichen  (epikureischen)  Erklarung  der  Phanomene,  nicht  aber  durch  den 
Mythos  bzw.  durch  die  allegorische  Auslegung  eines  Rituals  geschehen  kann. 
In  gleicher  Weise  ist  auch  der  ausgreifende  narrative  Epilog  des  Werkes,  die 
Beschreibung  der  Seuche  in  Athen  und  ihrer  Folgen  (6,  1138  ff.),  in  die  ar- 
gumentative Zielsetzung  fest  eingebunden:  Angesichts  einer  so  grauenhaften 
Wirklichkeitserfahrung  enthiillt  sich  auch  die  ganze  Nichtigkeit  der  religio, 
indem  alle  ihre  Auspragungen  durch  die  Realitat  hinweggefegt  werden. 

Den  strikten  Gegentyp  reprasentiert  der  pharmakologische  Lehrdichter  Nik- 
ander. Insofern  er  kein  eigentliches  Interesse  an  der  didaktischen  Vermittlung 
seines  Gegenstandes  hat,  sondern  seine  Aufgabe  primar  darin  sieht,  einen 


BERND  EFFE  4O5 

denkbar  dichtungsfernen  Stoff  zu  poetisieren,  bedient  er  sich  der  mytho- 
logischen  Exkurse  — es  handelt  sich  zumeist  um  sehr  abgelegene,  atiologische 
Sagen  — reichlich,  und  zwar  in  einer  ausschliefilich  ornamentalen  Funktion. 
Die  Digressionen  sind  sachlich  entbehrlich;  sie  haben  die  Aufgabe,  den  trocke- 
nen  Stoff  zu  poetisieren  bzw.  seine  systematische  Entfaltung  asthetisch  zu  struk- 
turieren.  Dafiir  einige  wenige  Beispiele.  Beide  Gedichte  setzen  an  den  Beginn 
der  Sachdarstellung  mythologische  Anspielungen  (Ther.  8  ff.;  Al.  13  ff.).  Sie 
dienen  der  literarischen  Einstimmung  des  Lesers  bzw.  betonen  die  generische 
Intention  des  Verfassers  (Hesiod-Nachfolge)  und  sind  inhaltlich  ebenso  ent- 
behrlich wie  etwa  die  atiologische  Erzahlung  von  der  Begegnung  zwischen 
Esel  und  Schlange  ( TTi^r.  343  ff.),  die  neben  der  ornamentalen  eine  strukturelle 
Funktion  besitzt:  Sie  markiert  eine  Zasur  innerhalb  der  Schlangenbe- 
schreibung.  Dasselbe  gilt  fur  zwei  aufeinander  bezogene  narrative  Digressionen 
liber  einen  gewissen  Alkibios,  den  offenbar  fiktiven  "Erfinder"  zweier  Heil- 
mittel;  sie  lockern  die  Pflanzenbeschreibung  auf  und  strukturieren  sie  zugleich 
(Ther.  541  ff.;  666  ff.). 

Demgegeniiber  besitzen  die  Exkurse  im  Lehrgedicht  des  transparenten  Typs 
eine  wichtige  thematische  Funktion.  Sie  riicken  dem  Leser  das  eigentliche 
Thema,  um  das  es  dem  Dichter  bei  seiner  Stoffausbreitung  tatsachlich  geht, 
immer  wieder  erneut  ins  Bewufitsein.  Indem  die  Digressionen  auf  diese  Weise 
der  Etablierung  und  der  Betonung  des  transparenten,  den  Stoff  transzendie- 
renden  didaktischen  AnUegens  dienen,  also  insofern  Trager  des  Themas  sind, 
ist  bei  ihnen  die  Bezeichnung  "Exkurs,"  "Digression"  an  sich  irrefiihrend.  Ich 
mochte  diesen  Sachverhalt  mit  zwei  Beispielen  aus  dem  Lehrgedicht  des  Arat 
demonstrieren.  Arat  verfolgt  mit  seinem  Stoff,  der  Beschreibung  der  Him- 
melsphanomene  und  Wetterzeichen,  kein  eigentlich  astronomisch- 
meteorologisches  Interesse;  es  geht  ihm  vielmehr  um  die  Bekundung  und  Ver- 
mittlung  eines  weltanschaulich-erbaulichen  Bekenntnisses:  Alle  Phanomene 
lassen  die  unendliche  und  umfassende  Giite  des  Zeus,  d.h.  der  gottlichen  Tipo- 
vota,  erkennen.  Im  Sinne  dieser  stoischen  Lehre  fiigt  Arat  gleich  zu  Beginn 
seiner  Sachdarstellung  eine  Sternsage  ein  (30  ff.):  den  Katasterismos  der  Barin- 
nen  durch  Zeus.  Damit  wird  ein  thematisch  wichtiger  Gedanke,  der  bereits 
das  Proomium  (einen  Zeus-Hymnos)  beherrscht  hat,  in  der  Form  des  My- 
thos  neu  unterstrichen:  Die  Sterne  sind  von  der  gottlichen  Vorsehung  als 
Zeichen  zum  Nutzen  der  Menschen  an  den  Himmel  gesetzt  (hier  handelt  es 
sich  um  wichtige  Zeichen  fur  die  Schiffahrt).^  In  gleicher  Weise  ist  der 
langste  Exkurs  des  Gedichts,  die  Parthenos-Episode  (98  ff.),  eng  mit  dem  ei- 
gentlichen  Thema  verbunden,  insofern  dieses  hier  in  eine  mythisch- 
geschichtliche  Perspektive  geriickt  wird.  Mit  der  ausgreifenden  Erzahlung  von 
der  "Jungfrau  Gerechtigkeit,"  die  im  Urzustand  der  Menschheit  offen  mit  den 
Menschen  verkehrte,  sich  dann  aber  in  dem  Mafie  von  der  Erde  zuriickzog, 
wie  auf  dieser  der  moralische  Verfall  zunahm,  bis  sie  schliefilich  am  Himmel 
ihre  Zuflucht  suchte,  gibt  Arat  in  der  Form  des  Mythos  eine  Erklarung  fiir 


406  *  DIGRESSIONEN   IM  ANTIKEN   LEHRGEDICHT 

die  gegenwartige  Situation  der  Menschen.  Ehemals  vollzog  sich  der  gottliche 
Beistand  unmittelbar;  heute  verkehrt  das  Gottliche  mit  den  Menschen  nur  mehr 
durch  Zeichen.  Neben  dieser  thematischen  hat  der  Exkurs  auch  eine 
hterarisch-generische  Funktion.  Er  spielt  unverkennbar  auf  die  Weltaltererzah- 
lung  in  Hesiods  Erga  an  und  markiert  so  den  Anspruch  des  hellenistischen  Lehr- 
dichters,  das  alte  Hesiodeische  Genre  zu  erneuern. 

Soweit  einige  wenige  Beispiele  fiir  die  typusbedingte  unterschiedliche  Funk- 
tionaUsierung  mythologischer  (und  sonstiger)  Digressionen.  Es  versteht  sich, 
dafi  die  einzelnen  Lehrdichter  dieses  poetische  Verfahren  quantitativ  jeweils 
verschieden  reahsieren  konnen.  So  macht  z.B.  Vergil,  ein  Reprasentant  des 
transparenten  Typs,  von  dem  Mittel  des  thematisch  relevanten  Exkurses  sehr 
viel  reicheren  Gebrauch  als  sein  Vorbild  Arat;  und  der  Oppian  genannte  Ver- 
fasser  der  griechischen  Kynegetika,  im  wesentlichen  ein  Vertreter  des  formalen 
Typs,  steigert  die  Verwendung  ornamentaler  Digressionen  ins  Extrem,  so  sehr, 
dafi  sich  bei  ihm  — ein  singularer  Fall  in  der  antiken  Gattungstradition  —  sogar 
einmal  ein  Vorverweis  auf  einen  langeren  Exkurs  findet:'^  Das  narrativ- 
fiktionale  Ornament  wird  wichtiger  als  der  Lehrgegenstand  selbst,  und  der  Leser 
wird  bereits  im  vorhinein  auf  das  poetische  Glanzlicht  hingewiesen. 

Es  versteht  sich  ferner,  dafi  in  dem  Mafie,  wie  die  Haltung  der  Autoren 
ihrem  Stoff  gegeniiber  in  dem  Werk  selbst  fluktuiert,  dieses  also  typologisch 
einen  Mischstatus  reprasentiert,  auch  die  Funktion  der  Digressionen  variieren 
kann.  So  fmden  sich  z.B.  bei  Manilius,  dessen  Darstellung  auf  weite  Strecken 
durch  eine  an  Lukrez  orientierte  strenge  Sachbezogenheit  charakterisiert  ist, 
gleichwohl  —  insbesondere  im  5.  Buch  — eine  Fiille  mythologischer  Digres- 
sionen, deren  rein  ornamentale  Funktion  unverkennbar  ist. 

Bemerkenswert  sind  schliefilich  die  Falle,  wo  im  Zuge  einer  engen  Anleh- 
nung  an  ein  bestimmtes  generisches  Vorbild  die  Tendenz  der  imitatio  auch  die 
Exkurstechnik  des  Vorbildes  erfafit,  ohne  allerdings  zugleich  auch  die  in  der 
Vorlage  geleistete  Funktionalisierung  der  Digressionen  zu  durchschauen  oder 
zu  iibernehmen.  So  resultieren  viele  Exkurse  in  Ps.-Oppians  Kynegetika  aus 
der  Absicht  des  Verfassers,  entsprechende  Glanzlichter  aus  Oppians  Halieu- 
tika  zu  reproduzieren,  wobei  deren  urspriingliche  thematische  Funktion  ver- 
lorengeht.  So  lehnt  sich  ferner  auch  Columella  in  seinem  Gartenbaugedicht, 
mit  dem  er  die  von  Vergil  in  den  Georgica  gelassene  sachliche  Liicke  komplet- 
tiert,  in  einem  Exkurs  (194  ff.;  Beschreibung  des  Fruhlings)  an  einen  entspre- 
chenden  Exkurs  Vergils  (Georg.  2,  323  ff.)  an  und  lafit  so  seine  Absicht  der 
imitatio  auch  auf  diese  Weise  deutlich  werden.  Aber  was  bei  Vergil  die  Funk- 
tion hatte,  als  "ein  Stiick  heiliger  Urzeit  der  Welt"  (Klingner)  das  gerade  das 
2.  Buch  durchziehende  Thema  der  Goldenen  Zeit  und  ihrer  Wiederkunft  aus 
der  verbliebenen  heilen  Welt  des  Landlebens  suggestiv  Gestalt  gewinnen  zu 
lassen,  thematisch  also  fest  eingebunden  war,  wird  bei  dem  Imitator  zu  einer 
rein  ornamentalen  Glanzstelle,  zu  einem  echten  Exkurs,  von  dem  er  sich  dann 
auch  als  von  einer  sachlich  unangemessenen,  poetischen  Abschweifung  zu  sei- 


BERND   EFFE 


407 


nem  kleinen,  niichternen  Stoff  zuriickruft  (215  ff.)  — zu  einem  Stoff,  von  dem 
er  selbst  in  der  Praefatio  sagt,  es  handle  sich  um  eine  "tenuis  admodum  et  paene 
viduata  corpore  materia":  Lehrgegenstand  und  poetischer  Exkurs  konnen  nicht 
scharfer  auseinandertreten. 

Ich  fasse  zusammen.  Die  mythologisch-narrativen  (und  die  sonstigen)  Di- 
gressionen  werden  in  der  antiken  Lehrdichtung— je  gemafi  der  Haltung  des 
Autors  seinem  Stoff  gegeniiber— in  folgender  Weise  funktionalisiert.  Sie  dienen 
entweder  der  Verdeutlichung  des  sachlichen  Anliegens  bzw.  des  den  Stoff  trans- 
zendierenden  eigentlichen  Themas,  oder  sie  haben  eine  primar  ornamentale 
Funktion  im  Sinne  einer  aufierlichen  Poetisierung  des  Lehrgegenstandes.  Da- 
neben  bieten  sie  dem  Autor  die  Gelegenheit,  die  Gattungstradition  bzw.  den 
(gelegentlich  auch  kritischen)^  Bezug  zu  bestimmten  generischen  Vorgangern 
zu  betonen.  Unabhangig  jedoch  von  den  je  spezifischen  Funktionen  sind  die 
narrativen  Digressionen  geeignet,  die  von  Aristoteles  monierte  Spannung  von 
poetischer  Form  und  prosaischem  Inhalt,  bzw.  konkreter:  das  mimetische 
Defizit  der  Gattung  zu  vermindern  und  den  Dichtungsanspruch  der  Autoren 
zu  unterstreichen. 


Anmerkungen 


1 .  Inwieweit  dieses  Verfahren  sich  einer  bewufiten  und  zielgerichteten  Reaktion  auf 
die  AristoteUsche  Gattungsschelte  verdankt,  mufi  mangels  expHziter  Aufierungen  da- 
hingestellt  bleiben.  Das  literarisch-poetologische  Reflexionsniveau  Arats,  des  helleni- 
stischen  Erneuerers  des  Genres,  legt  den  Gedanken  an  einen  solchen  Bezug  jedenfalls 
nahe. 

2.  Vgl.  zum  Folgenden  Verf.,  Dichtung  und  Lehre.  Untersuchungen  zur  Typologie  des  an- 
tiken Lehrgedichts ,  Miinchen  1977,  bes.  28  ff. 

3.  Die  Poesie  als  Koder,  der  die  bittere  Medizin  der  anstrengenden  Lektiire  ver- 
siifet:  Lukr.  1,  921  ff. 

4.  Naheres  wieder  in  dem  o.  Anm.  2  genannten  Buch. 

5.  Vgl.  besonders  das  Bild  des  der  Venus  ergebenen  Mars  (1,  31  ff.). 

6.  Es  ist  eine  Konsequenz  der  bei  Arat  vorliegenden  themabezogenen  Funktiona- 
lisierung  narrativer  Digressionen,  dafi  von  der  durch  den  Stoff  gegebenen  Moglichkeit 
einer  ausgiebigen  Entfaltung  ornamenteiler  Verstirnungssagen  kein  Gebrauch  gemacht 
wird. 

7.  3,  82  f.:  4,  233  ff.  (mythologisch-atiologische  Erzahlung  von  der  Metamorphose 
der  thebanischen  Dionysos-Verehrerinnen  in  Leoparden). 

8.  So  dient  die  vom  Aetna-Dichter  erzahlte  impiafabula  von  der  Gigantomachie  (41 
ff. :  vom  Autor  als  Blasphemie  abgelehnt)  u.a.  dazu,  beim  Leser  einen  kritischen  Bezug 
zum  Lehrgedicht  des  Manilius  zu  evozieren,  in  dem  sich  solche  unangemessenen 
Gottermythen  fmden  (vgl.  Verf.,  a.O.  216  ff.). 


I 


Auf  der  Suche  nach  dem  Lehrgedicht 
in  einigen  neulateinischen  Poetiken 

F.  Akkerman 


ch  habe  es  mir  zur  Aufgabe  gemacht,  der  Haltung  einiger  neulateini- 
scher  Autoren  dem  Lehrgedicht  gegeniiber  nachzuspiiren.  Fiir  dieses 
Kurzreferat  stiitze  ich  mich  dabei  auf  folgende  Texte:^ 


Boccaccio,  Genealogie  deorum  gentilium,  Liber  XIV  (ca.  1365) 

G.  Pontano,  die  Dialoge  Actius,  Aegidius  und  Antonius  (1491-1500) 

G.  Vida,  Poeticorum  libri  tres  (geschr.  1520,  gedr.  1527) 

G.  Fracastoro,  Naugerius  sive  de  poetica  dialogus  (ca.  1550,  gedr.  1555) 

J.  C.  Scaliger,  Poetices  libri  septem  (1561) 

Natiirlich  mafie  ich  mir  nicht  an,  aufgrund  einer  so  beschrankten  Studie  zu 
defmitiven  Aussagen  zu  kommen  oder  neue  wissenschaftliche  Resultate  vorle- 
gen  zu  konnen.  Vielleicht  hat  es  aber  einen  Sinn  und  kann  die  anschliefiende 
Diskussion  fordern,  wenn  ich  einige  Bemerkungen  zu  meiner  Lektiire  mache 
und  Beobachtungen  hierzu  vorlege. 

Was  die  oben  genannten  lateinischen  Texte  iiber  Poesie  zu  sagen  haben, 
lafit  sich  in  drei  Aspekte  aufgliedern. 

1)  Sie  verteidigen  die  Poesie  gegen  Geringschatzung  von  seiten  der  traditio- 
nellen  Universitatsfacher. 

2)  Sie  disputieren  iiber  Wesen  und  Ziel  der  Poesie. 

3)  Sie  zeigen  und  riihmen  die  Schonheiten  der  antiken  Dichtwerke. 

Es  lafit  sich  nun  von  vomherein  kaum  erwarten,  dafi  von  diesen  drei  Gesichts- 
punkten  her  viel  iiber  eine  spezielle  Gattung  der  Dichtung  zu  sagen  ware. 
Die  von  mir  herangezogenen  Texte  konzentrieren  sich  in  erster  Linie  auf  das 
Poetische  im  allgemeinen,  als  eine  selbstandige  und  vollwertige  Art  des  Sa- 
gens.  Ihre  Verfasser  haben  es  schon  schwer  genug,  die  Bedeutung  dieser  Form 
der  Oratio  zu  postulieren  und  gegen  Philosophic  und  Rhetorik  zu  verteidigen. 
Diese  Dichter  und  Theoretiker  sind  eben  im  Begriff,  die  Kultur  zu  poetisieren; 
sie  stehen  sozusagen  an  den  Aufiengrenzen  ihres  Territoriums  und  iiberblicken 


410  '  DAS  LEHRGEDICHT  IN  EINIGEN  NEULATEINISCHEN   POETIKEN 

eher  das  ganze  Gebiet  als  dafi  sie  sich  darum  bemiihten,  die  eigene  Art  und 
Funktion  der  Teilgebiete  zu  untersuchen.  Nicht  nur  iiber  das  Lehrgedicht  sagen 
sie  nahezu  nichts,  auch  iiber  Lyrik,  Pastorale,  Satire,  Epigramm  liest  man 
in  dieser  Art  von  Schriften  wenig  oder  gar  nichts  Interessantes.  Auch  wenn 
sie  z.B.  ein  Genre  wie  das  Heldenepos  bevorzugen,  wie  sie  es  haufig  tun,  be- 
handeln  sie  es  nicht  als  eine  spezielle  Gattung,  sondern  als  die  hochste  Form 
von  Poesie  schlechthin.  Vielleicht  sind  daher  die  Poetiken  auch  nicht  die  rich- 
tigen  Quellen,  um  iiber  die  Gattungen  neue  oder  alte  Fachkenntnisse  zu  lie- 
fern.  Vielleicht  soUte  man  lieber  Grammatiker  und  Kommentare  zu  Rate 
Ziehen.^  Fiir  das  Lehrgedicht  gilt  das  ganz  besonders,  weil  ja  auch  im  Alter- 
tum  dieses  Genre  nur  bei  dem  Grammatiker  Diomedes  und  dem  Kommen- 
tator  Servius  wenigstens  einige  Beachtung  gefunden  hat.^  Aber  meine  kleine 
Untersuchung  hat  sich  eben  auf  die  genannten  Texte  beschrankt. 

Im  eben  Gesagten  lassen  sich  drei  Griinde  erkennen,  warum  diese  Poetiken 
der  friihen  Renaissance  wenig  iiber  das  Lehrgedicht  vorzubringen  wissen: 

1)  Weil  die  Alten  es  zwar  praktisch  grofiartig  gepflegt,  aber  theoretisch  kaum 
unterschieden  und  naher  behandelt  haben.  Offenbar  ist  es  denn  auch  fiir  die 
friihen  Neulateiner  schwierig,  selbstandig  neue  Wege  zu  gehen. 

2)  Weil  die  neulateinischen  Poetiken  sich  anfangs  theoretisch  iiberhaupt  wenig 
fiir  die  besonderen  Gattungen  interessieren,  und  das  hangt  wiederum  damit 
zusammen,  dafi  sie 

3)  das  Wesen  der  Poesie  durch  die  Schonheiten  der  einzelnen  Kunstmittel  be- 
stimmt  sahen  und  deswegen  ihre  Aufmerksamkeit  in  erster  Linie  vielfach  der 
Wortwahl,  der  Wortfolge,  den  Klang-  und  Redefiguren,  den  metrischen  und 
rhythmischen  Besonderheiten  zuwendeten. 

Dieses  Letzte  war  vermutlich  auch  die  wichtigste  Aufgabe,  die  sie  zu  erfiil- 
len  hatten,  und  darin  haben  sie  dann  auch  wirklich  Bewundernswertes  gelei- 
stet.  Man  kann  wohl  sagen,  dafi  diese  Autoren  die  Poesie  fiir  uns  entdeckt 
haben. 

4)  Es  gibt  einen  vierten  Grund,  warum  es  ihnen  schwer  fiel,  vom  Lehrgedicht 
zu  reden;  es  ist  derselbe,  der  auch  fiir  uns  noch  gilt.  Das  Genre  ist  nicht  ein- 
fach  zu  definieren,  u.a.  weil  das  Lehrhafte  daran  in  alien  grofien  Vorbildern, 
mindestens  auf  der  unteren  Ebene  der  Betrachtung,  fiktiv  ist.  Die  Neulateiner 
lebten  vor  allem  mit  den  zwei  lateinischen  Meisterwerken  von  Lukrez  und  Ver- 
gil, die  in  mancher  Hinsicht  zwar  sehr  verschieden  sind,  aber  doch  darin  iiber- 
einstimmen,  dafi  keines  der  beiden  Lehrgedichte  wirklich  einen  konkreten 
Lehrstoff  an  lernbegierige  Schiiler  weitergeben  will.  Beide  sind  Heilslehren; 
die  eine  wendet  sich  an  den  Einzelnen  mit  seinen  Angsten  und  Fragen  nach 
dem  Sinn  des  Lebens,  die  andere  an  den  Staatsbiirger,  der  besorgt  ist  um  den 
Verfall  der  romischen  Gesellschaft.  Vergil  hat  sich  auch  in  diesem  Verhaltnis 
zu  Lukrez  verstanden  und  zu  verstehen  gegeben.  Und  soweit  sie  doch  lehren, 
gilt  in  beiden  Fallen,  wie  Fabian  es  wenigstens  fiir  Lukrez  ausgedriickt  hat, 
dafi  der  Dichter  nicht  einen  Gegenstand  lehrt,  sondern  dafi  er  lehrt  vermittels 
seiner  Lehre.* 


F.    AKKERMAN  4II 

5)  Dazu  kommt  dann  fiir  den  Humanisten,  wie  fur  uns,  noch  das  zusatzliche 
Problem  der  in  der  Zeit  perspektivisch  sich  verschiebenden  Sicht  auf  die  Dich- 
tung  und  ihre  jeweiligen  Gegenstande,  also  auch  auf  das  Verhaltnis  zwischen 
Dichtung  und  Wissenschaft.  Ich  kann  dies  noch  mit  einem  Vorbild  aus  mo- 
derner  Zeit  verdeutlichen:  Im  neunzehnten  Jahrhundert  waren  viele  Philo- 
sophen  davon  iiberzeugt,  dafi  mit  Kant  die  ganze  Philosophie  aus  den  vorigen 
Jahrhunderten  iiberholt  sei.  Zwar  bewunderte  man  die  Ethica  des  Spinoza  noch 
sehr,  glaubte  auch  gerne  an  die  Heilsbotschaft,  die  in  ihr  enthalten  war,  aber 
man  hielt  die  geometrische  Beweisfiihrung  fiir  philosophisch  unzulanglich; 
Heine  meinte:  "Die  Lehre  des  Spinoza  hat  sich  aus  der  mathematischen  Hiille 
entpuppt  und  umflattert  uns  als  ein  Goethe'sches  Lied."  So  kann  ein  sehr 
fachmannisch  geschriebenes  Buch  zum  Lehrgedicht  werden. 

Haben  also  die  friihneulateinischen  Poetiken  nicht  viel  zum  Lehrgedicht 
zu  sagen,  der  damalige  kulturelle  Kontext  hat  eine  grofie  Menge  an  Lehrge- 
dichten  entstehen  lassen.  Die  allgemeine  grofie  Liebe  zur  Dichtkunst,  die  nach 
alien  Seiten  sich  ausbreitenden  wissenschaftlichen  Interessen  und  das  grofie 
Bediirfnis  nach  Lehren  und  Lernen  haben  offenbar  einen  fruchtbaren  Boden 
fiir  das  Entstehen  des  Lehrgedichtes  geformt.  Und  diese  Situation  ist  nun  doch 
auch  in  den  Poetiken,  auf  die  ich  mich  hier  beziehe,  gut  fiihlbar.  Auch  wenn 
sie  nicht  vom  Lehrgedicht  sprechen,  sie  haben  doch  oftmals  poetische  Stoffe 
im  Sinn,  die  wir  zum  eigentlichen  Stoff  des  Lehrgedichts  rechnen. 

Ich  mochte  nun  einige  Bemerkungen  machen  iiber  jeden  der  genannten 
Texte. 

Fiir  Boccaccio  sind  die  Dichter  "non  fabulosos  homines  .  .  .  sed  eruditissi- 
mos."  Er  preist  die  "eruditorum  hominum  vigilias,  meditationes  et  studia,  ho- 
nestosque  labores  et  modestiam."  Die  Dichtkunst  wird  sogar  von  den  Juristen 
als  eine  scientia  unter  den  anderen  anerkannt,  sei  es  auch  eine  wertlose.  Boc- 
caccio stellt  die  Poesie  auf  die  gleiche  Linie  mit  der  "philosophia,  re  rum  ma- 
gistra,  cuius  opere  entium  causas  discimus."  Sie  erhebt  Anspruch  auf 
Anerkennung  wegen  derselben  Unveranderlichket,  die  die  anderen  Wissen- 
schaften  zu  eigen  haben:  "poesis  .  .  .  stabilis  est  et  fixa  scientia  .  .  .  eternis  fun- 
data  atque  solidata  principiis."  Der  Unterschied  zur  Philosophie  liegt  nicht 
"silogizando,"  sondern  "sub  velamento  fictionis."  Diese  Fiktionen  miissen  zilso 
gedeutet  werden.  Ein  konkreter  Unterschied  zwischen  Poesie  und  Historio- 
graphie  ist,  dafi  diese  ihre  Erzahlungen  einfach  beim  Anfang  des  Geschehens 
beginnt,  die  Poesie  aber  "artificio  quodam  longe  maiori"  eher  in  der  Mitte  oder 
gegen  Ende  der  Geschichte.  Dieses  ab  ow-Thema  fmdet  man  auch  in  den 
spateren  Poetiken  haufig  wieder.  Lukan  wird  eben  deswegen  getadelt,  weil 
er  beim  Beginn  beginnt:  er  ist  "potius  metricus  hystoriographus  quam  poeta." 
Noch  ein  fester  Bestandteil  dieser  Poetiken  ist  das  Verhaltnis  zur  Rhetorik: 
Die  Dichtkunst  ist  keine  Rhetorik,  aber  sie  macht  Gebrauch  von  ihr.  Von  Lehr- 
gedichten  spricht  Boccaccio  iiberhaupt  nicht,  er  nennt  einmal  die  Georgica;  den 
Lukrez  gab  es  noch  nicht.  Aber  es  ist  deutlich,  dafi  eigentlich  alle  Dichtung 
fiir  ihn  lehrhaft  ist. 


412  DAS  LEHRGEDICHT  IN  EINIGEN  NEULATEINISCHEN  POETIKEN 

Nun  einiges  iiber  Pontano.  In  grofiartiger  Weise  stellt  er  die  Eigenart  und 
Wiirde  der  Poesie  gegeniiber  den  anderen  Disziplinen  dar.  Im  Antonius  lobt 
er  den  Vergil,  weil  er  in  der  Beschreibung  des  Aetna^  nicht  durch  Verglei- 
chungen  mit  anderen  Dingen  spricht,  sondern  sich  festhalt  an  den  Dingen  selbst 
("rebus  ipsis  inhaerens");  er  geht  nicht  von  der  Natur  der  Sache  ab  ("a  rei  na- 
tura  non  recedit").  So  verteidigt  Pontano  Vergil  gegen  die  Kritik  des  Philo- 
sophen  Favorinus  bei  Gellius,  weil  der  "ein  nicht  geniigend  grofier  Physiker 
zu  sein  scheint,  da  er  die  Natur  des  Berges  Aetna  nicht  kennt."  Also  im  ei- 
gentlich  physikalischen  Stoff  kennt  der  Dichter,  "rebus  ipsis  inhaerens,"  deren 
Natur  besser  als  der  rationale  Philosoph.  In  zwei  anderen  Dialogen  geht  er 
auf  das  Problem  der  Dichtung  ein,  im  ActiiLS  und  im  Aegidius;  im  Actius  ver- 
gleicht  er  Ziel  und  Aufgabe  der  Dichtung  ausfiihrlich  mit  Geschichtsschrei- 
bung  und  Redekunst.  Das  eigentliche  Ziel  der  Dichtung  geht  iiber  das  prodesse 
und  delectare  des  Horaz  und  auch  iiber  das  movere  des  Redners  hinaus;  es  be- 
steht  im  Erwecken  von  Bewunderung  durch  Worte  und  Sachen:  "non  verbis 
modo  magnificis,  sed  rebus  quoque,  et  inventis  excellenter  et  expressis,  ad- 
miratio  a  poetis  quaeritur."  Die  Dichtkunst  hat  dieselben  Aufgaben  wie  die 
Physik,  Geschichtsschreibung  und  Gerichtsrede,  aber  sie  transzendiert  sie  alle 
durch  ihre  grofiartige  Darstellungsweise.  Die  Poesie  ist  die  "doctrinarum  om- 
nium mater  foecundissima;  princeps  de  Deo  disseruit .  .  .  docuit  habere  rerum 
humanarum  curam  .  .  .  prima  excitavit  ad  virtutem  homines  ..."  und  in  einer 
Apostrophe  der  Poesie  selbst:  "tu  e  silvis  homines  eruisti  atque  e  speluncis. 
Per  te  noscimus,  per  te  praeterita  ante  oculos  cernimus,  per  te  Deum  sapi- 
mus."  Von  der  Dichtung  geht  jede  Art  des  Sprechens  aus,  die  Dichter  sind 
die  ersten  Gesetzgeber  gewesen  und  die  ersten  Naturforscher.  Empedokles  und 
dessen  Nachfolger  Lukrez  werden  von  Pontano  gepriesen.  Die  Georgica  des  Ver- 
gil werden  als  Beispiel  dafiir  genannt,  dafi  "bei  jedem  zur  Besprechung  auf- 
gegriffenen  Stoff  .  .  .  dem  Dichter  eine  Grofie  und  Erhabenheit  zu  eigen  sei, 
die  sich  nie  mit  der  Mittelmafiigkeit  zufrieden  gebe." 

In  dem  anderen  Dialog,  dem  Aegidius,  werden  Vergil  und  Lukrez  in  einem 
Atem  genannt  als  didaktische  Dichter.  Es  entspinnt  sich  namlich  eine  Dis- 
kussion  iiber  die  Frage,  warum  Vergil  im  ersten  Buch  der  Georgica  gleich  mit 
dem  Pfliigen  beginnt  und  nicht  erst  iiber  die  "natura  soli"  oder  die  "natura 
regionum"  von  Italien  spricht;  so  habe  Vergil  sehr  schon  mit  der  Behandlung 
der  Bienenzucht  und  der  Baumpflainzung  angefangen,  aber  der  abrupte  Be- 
ginn  des  Abschnitts  iiber  den  Ackerbau  sei  ein  Problem  "zumal  in  dieser  Art 
von  Schriften,  das  unsere  Litteratoren  mit  einem  griechischen  Wort  genus  di- 
dascalicum  nennen  ('pertinet  enim  ad  erudiendum  sive  auditorem  sive  disci- 
pulum'),  man  bisweilen  mit  noch  weiter  abgelegenen  Anfangen  beginnt."  Als 
Beispiel  dafiir  werden  Ovids  Metamorphosen  zitiert,  die  die  Entstehung  der  Welt 
mit  dem  Chaos  (einer  "res  incomperta")  anfangen  lassen.^  Zwei  der  Ge- 
sprachspartner  des  Dialogs  versuchen  eine  Antwort  auf  das  Problem  zu  geben. 
Der  eine,  Puccius,  sagt,  dafi  es  die  Aufgabe  des  Lehrdichters  ist  zu  erwagen,  ob 


F.    AKKERMAN 


413 


er,  bevor  er  die  eigentlichen  praecepta  zu  tradieren  beginnt,  dem  Leser  iiber 
irgendeine  Sache  Auskunft  geben  mufi.  Vergil  hat  das  bei  der  Behandlung  des 
Ackerbaus  iibergangen,  weil  er  sich  an  Bauern  wendete,  die  den  Boden  und 
die  Gegenden  Italiens  genau  kannten.  Man  kann  die  Erklarung  nicht  darin 
suchen,  sagt  Puccius,  dafi  die  Dichter  geme  "a  mediis  rebus"  beginnen,  denn 
das  steht  eben  dem  Dichter  des  genus  didascalicum  nicht  zu;  das  ist  nur  zuge- 
lassen  "in  aho  dicendi  genere,  ut  in  enarrandis  bellis  explicandisque  rebus  ges- 
tis."  Der  Gesprachspartner  im  Dialog  (Thamyras)  stellt  eine  andere  Theorie 
auf:  es  gehe  Vergil  und  Lukrez  darum,  den  Anfang  und  das  Ende  ihrer  Biicher 
mit  besonderer  Schonheit  zu  schmiicken,  um  an  diesen  wichtigen  Stellen  dem 
Horer  und  Schiiler  Freude  zu  bereiten.  Denn  es  ist  zwar  das  "officium"  des 
Poeten,  den  Horer  zu  "docere,"  zu  "delectare"  und  zu  "movere,"  aber  wie  ver- 
schieden  diese  drei  auch  sind,  sie  treten  doch  nicht  geschieden  auf.  Man  kann 
den  Schiiler  nicht  lehren  oder  bewegen,  ohne  ihn  zugleich  auch  geniefien  zu 
lassen.  Der  abrupte  Beginn  des  Ackerbaus  bei  Vergil  ist  also  in  Wirklichkeit 
ein  "magnum  artificium."  So  zeigt  Pontano,  der  ja  selber  ein  grofier  Lehrdich- 
ter  war,  dafi  er  sich  auch  im  kleinen  dariiber  klar  ist,  als  Lehrdichter  eine  be- 
sondere  Art  Poesie  zu  schreiben,  die  besonderen  Gesetzen  gehorchen  mufi. 
Im  ganzen  mag  es  deutlich  geworden  sein,  dafi  mit  Pontano  die  Dichtkunst 
im  humanistischen  Denken  schon  einen  sehr  hohen  Rang  erreicht  hat.  Uber 
die  heitere,  spielerische  Dialogfiihrung,  mit  zahlreichen  Abstechern  in  allerlei 
Wissensbereiche,  brauche  ich  mich  jetzt  nicht  zu  verbreiten. 

Uber  Vida  konnen  wir  uns  kurz  fassen.  Seine  Poetik,  selbst  ein  didaktisches 
Epos  in  drei  Biichern,  bietet  eine  angenehme  Lektiire,  steuert  aber  kaum  etwas 
zu  unserem  Thema  bei.  Zum  Lehrgedicht  bezieht  dieser  beharrliche  Lehr- 
dichter keine  Stellung.  Er  erklart  sofort,  dafi  er  vor  allem  lehren  will,  die  Gotter 
und  Helden  und  ihre  grofien  Taten  zu  besingen,  wobei  er  freilich  hofft,  dafi 
auch  die  Dichter  der  anderen  Gattungen  davon  etwas  Niitzliches  mitbekom- 
men,  und  er  zahlt  auf:  die  Biihnendichtung,  die  Elegie,  die  Ecloge  "und  was 
es  sonst  noch  gibt."  Das  Lehrgedicht  wird  nicht  genannt.  Mit  einer  Laus  Ver- 
gilii  endet  das  dritte  Buch,  und  eigentlich  ist  das  ganze  Werk  ein  durchge- 
hendes  Lob  des  Vergilischen  Heldenepos.  Diese  Funktion  hat  es  vermutlich 
auch  lange  Zeit  gehabt:  in  angenehmer,  behaglicher  Form  die  Schonheiten 
Vergils  aufzuzahlen.  Was  an  theoretischem  Geriist  doch  enthalten  ist,  stammt 
von  Horaz.  Ein  praktisches  Lehrbuch,  um  das  Verseschreiben  zu  lernen,  ist 
es  eben  nicht.  Insofern  ist  auch  dies  ein  fiktives  Lehrgedicht.  Natiirlich  kennt 
Vida  auch  Lukrez,  preist  und  zitiert  ihn  sogar,  aber  er  nennt  ihn  nicht  mit 
Namen.^  Vergils  Georgica  werden  ein  paarmal  genannt  und  noch  viel  haufiger 
benutzt,  vielleicht  noch  haufiger  zitiert  als  die  Aeneis.  Hier  konnte  er  ja  die 
Formel,  die  er  fiir  das  eigentliche  praecipere  brauchte,  fmden. 

Fracastoro  baut  weiter  auf  Pontano  auf,  den  er  auch  zitiert.  In  seiner  Poetica, 
ebenfalls  ein  Dialog,  in  dem  der  Dichter  Navagero  Fracastoro's  Standpunkt 
vertritt,  wird  scharfer  formuliert  und  diskutiert  als  bei  Pontano;  es  wird  nun 


414  DAS  LEHRGEDICHT  IN  EINIGEN  NEULATEINISCHEN  POETIKEN 

auch  deutlich  Bezug  genommen  auf  Aristoteles,  dessen  Mimesisbegriff  in  den 
oben  besprochenen  Schriften  noch  keine  RoUe  gespielt  hatte,^  waiter  auf  Cice- 
ro's De  oratore  und  natiirlich  auch  auf  Horaz,  Die  wichtigsten  Punkte  fur  un- 
seren  Zweck  fasse  ich  hier  kurz  zusammen: 

1.  Obschon  Fracastoro  das  Lehrgedicht  nirgendwo  erwahnt  und  eben  auch 
hier  und  da  dem  Heldenepos  den  nunmehr  traditionellen  Ehrenplatz  gonnt, 
ist  es  iiberall  klar,  dafi  er  in  seinen  Ausfuhrungen  das  didaktische  Epos  im 
Zentrum  seiner  Gedanken  hat. 

2 .  Mit  Aristoteles  verwirft  er  das  Metrum  als  definierendes  Kriterium  fur  die 
Poesie.  Aber  entschieden  gegen  Aristoteles  Stellung  beziehend,  meint  er,  was 
die  Mimesis  betrifft: 

a.  dafi  sie  nicht  nur  Menschen  zum  Objekt  des  Imitierens  (Fracastoro  bevor- 
zugt  die  Worter  "repraesentare"  und  "repraesentatio")  nimmt  (d.h.,  dafi  die 
"repraesentatio"  nicht  nur  "personas  inducit"),  sondern  auch  andere  natiirliche 
Dinge.  Er  will  bestimmt  die  Moglichkeit  ausschliefien,  dafi  man  Empedocles 
aus  der  Dichtung  verbannen  konnte  wie  Aristoteles  es  gewagt  hatte,  und  driickt 
es  einfach  so  aus,  dafi  es  nicht  angeht,  Vergil  in  der  Aeneis  einen  Dichter  zu 
nennen,  aber  in  den  Georgica  nicht.  Er  bezieht  sich  fur  die  Argumentation  seiner 
Behauptung  auf  die  Aristotelische  Zweiteilung  des  menschlichen  Geistes  in  "vo- 
luntas" und  "intellectus."  Das  Ziel  der  "voluntas"  ist  "prudentia,"  die  erreicht 
werden  kann  mit  Hilfe  der  "imitatio"  von  Personen,  das  Ziel  des  "intellectus" 
ist  "cognitio,"  die  gefordert  wird  durch  die  "repraesentatio"  natiirlicher  Sachen. 
Hier  wird  also  das  Lehrgedicht  philosophisch  legitimiert. 

b.  Aber  dann  weicht  er,  was  die  Mimesis  betrifft,  auch  darin  von  Aristoteles 
ab,  dafi  er  in  ihr  nichts  Spezifisches,  Bestimmendes,  fiir  die  Dichtung  sieht. 
Auch  die  anderen,  sagen  wir  die  Fachleute,  dozieren  mittels  "repraesentatio," 
meint  Fracastoro,  zum  Beispiel  die  Historiker.  Alles  was  auf  irgendeine  Weise 
doziert  wird,  wird  durch  Imitation  gelehrt. 

3.  Das  "delectare"  als  "fmis  poetae"  wird  von  Fracastoro  als  zu  billig  verworfen. 
Die  Griechen  nannten  die  Dichter  gottlich,  die  Kaiser  ehrten  sie.  Es  mufi  also 
ein  hoheres  Ziel  geben.  Auch  mit  dem  "prodesse"  kommt  man  nicht  aus.  Zwar 
dozieren  die  Dichter  viele  niitzliche  Dinge,  aber  das  tun  auch  die  Fachleute 
der  Disziplinen,  die  wir  in  der  Dichtung  vertreten  fmden.  Das  "prodesse"  tut 
der  Dichter  nicht  kraft  seiner  "propria  facultas"  als  Dichter. 

4.  Es  gibt  keinen  spezifisch  dichterischen  Stoff.  Fracastoro  zitiert  Horaz:  "pub- 
licam  omnem  et  communem  materiam  .  .  .  propriam  poetae  fieri,  si  poetico 
more  tractetur."  Seine  eigene  Schlufifolgerung  ist:  "omnis  .  .  .  materia  poetae 
convenit,  dummodo  exornari  possit."  Das  fiir  die  Dichtkunst  Spezifische  liegt 
also  nicht  im  "prodesse,"  nicht  im  "delectare,"  nicht  in  der  Mimesis,  sondern 
in  dem  "poetico  more,"  im  "modus  dicendi."  "Dichterisch,"  sagt  Wahrigs  Deut- 
sches  Worterbuch,  ist  "in  formvollendeter  Sprache  abgefafit."  Und  das  meint  Fra- 
castoro auch. 

5.  Diese  formvollendete  Sprache  ist  also  das  eigentliche  Fachgebiet  des  Dich- 


F.    AKKERMAN  415 

ters.  Mit  einer  Argumentation,  die  von  Cicero's  De  oratore  herriihrt,  wird  nun 
der  Dichter  von  Fracastoro  als  der  voUendete  Sprachkiinstler  hoch  iiber  alle 
Disziplinen  gestellt.  In  der  kulturellen  Hierarchie  nimmt  der  Dichter  den  Platz 
des  ciceronianischen  Orators  ein. 

6.  Die  Kraft  des  Dichters  liegt  in  der  allgemeinen  Idee,  im  Universalen:  dazu 
stimmt  Fracastoro  dem  Aristoteles  wieder  bei.  Der  Dichter  braucht  nicht  alles 
von  allem  zu  wissen,  er  imitiert  die  transzendente  Idee  eines  jeden  Stoffes,  die 
mit  all  ihren  Schonheiten  ausgestattet  ist:  "imitatur  simplicem  ideam  pulchri- 
tudinibus  suis  vestitam."  Die  anderen,  die  Fachleute,  imitieren  das  "singulare, 
hoc  est  rem  nudam,  uti  est."  Die  Schonheit  ist  nicht  ein  Absolutes,  sie  besteht 
in  der  Harmonic  mit  dem  gewahlten  Stoff.  So  kann  auch  iiber  einen  nie- 
drigen  Gegenstand  ein  voUendetes  Kunstwerk  geschaffen  werden.  Der  Dich- 
ter mufi  von  jedem  Gegenstand  alle  seine  Schonheiten  kennen. 

7.  Aber  der  Gesprachspartner  Bardulone  beharrt  auf  seinen  kritischen  Fra- 
gen:  Was  denn  der  Nutzen  der  Poesie  sei,  wenn  der  Dichter  doch  nur  "mire, 
apposite,  musicissime"  spreche,  aber  seinen  Stoff  anderen  Wissenschaften  ent- 
nimmt?  Ist  es  letzten  Endes  nicht  doch  nur  "delectare,"  was  er  tut?  Wenn  man, 
um  die  Landwirtschaft  zu  lernen,  doch  zu  Varro  oder  Mago  Carthaginiensis 
geht,  Physik  von  Theophrast  und  Aristoteles  lemt,  nicht  von  Empedocles  und 
Lukrez  (sic!  Hier  beginnt  Empedocles  aus  der  Physik  ausgeschlossen  und  nur 
der  Dichtkunst  zugerechnet  zu  werden,  genau  umgekehrt  wie  bei  Aristoteles). 
Die  Antwort  von  Navagero  ist,  dafi  der  Dichter  in  der  Tat  im  praktischen  Leben 
von  viel  geringerem  Nutzen  ist  als  die  Fachwissenschaftler,  aber  dafi  er  von 
alien,  die  "dicendo  utiles  esse  solent,"  weitaus  der  niitzlichste  ist,  "quatenus 
quisque  scribit."  Und  weiter  sind  die  Schonheiten  nicht  auf  das  Sprachliche 
beschrankt.  Auch  was  den  Stoff  anbetrifft,  weifi  der  Dichter  alle  "excellentias" 
und  "pulchritudines,"  der  Fachmann  dagegen  nur  wenige.  Der  Dichter  gibt 
immer  ein  Extra,  "poeta  plura  docet,"  sowohl  im  Bereich  der  "prudentia"  als 
auf  dem  Gebiet  der  "cognitio."  Man  vergleiche  nur  die  paar  diirftigen  Seiten, 
die  ein  Varro  oder  Cato  iiber  die  "res  rustica"  geschrieben  haben,  mit  alien 
vier  Biichern  der  Georgica. 

Ist  aber  das  Extra  von  Vergil  nicht  eben  ein  von  aufien  Herangeholtes,  fragt 
Bardulone  weiter— und  er  nennt  das  das  Fiktionelle  ("fabula")  — ,  und  wird  an- 
dererseits  nicht  auch  viel  vom  Dichter  verworfen  und  weggelassen?  (Selektion, 
Hinzufiigung,  Weglassung,  Ubertreibung,  Schmuck,  nahezu  das  ganze  Ar- 
senal der  Fiktionalisierung  ist  Fracastoro  bekannt!).  Navagero  gibt  zu,  dafi  viel 
vom  Dichter  weggelassen  wird,  vor  allem  dasjenige,  was  schandlich  ist  oder 
sich  nicht  eignet  fiir  Verschonerung  in  der  Behandlung:  "ea  .  .  .  quae  aut  tur- 
pia  sunt,  aut  tractata  .  .  .  nitescere  non  possunt."  Man  kann  hier  denken  an 
den  Geschlechtsverkehr  als  "causa  proxima"  der  Syphilis,  der  von  Fracastoro 
in  seinem  Epos  nicht  einmal  erwahnt  oder  auch  nur  aingedeutet  wird;  nur  die 
sogenannte  astral  verursachte  Miasmenlehre  zur  Erklarung  epidemischer 
Seuchen,  die  "causa  prima,"  eignete  sich  offensichtlich  fiir  Verschonerung 


4l6  '  DAS  LEHRGEDICHT  IN  EINIGEN  NEULATEINISCHEN  POETIKEN 

durch  die  Poesie.  Die  Epidemie  als  solche  war  natiirlich  traditionell  sehr  geeig- 
net  fiir  poetische  Beschreibung.  Aber,  so  behauptet  Navagero,  es  wird  viel 
mehr  hinzugefiigt  als  weggelassen.  Und  was  Bardulone  von  aufien  Heran- 
geholtes  nennt  ("extra  rem"),  das,  so  sagt  Navagero,  ist  eben  das  Essentielle 
("essentialia  et  necessaria").  So  wie  in  der  Natur  alles  seine  "perfectio"  hat,  so 
ist  es  auch  in  der  Kunst.  Fracastoro  ist  der  Ansicht,  dafi  die  Kunst  das  Voll- 
kommene  der  Natur  in  vollkommener  Weise  reproduziert.  Die  Fachwissen- 
schaften  operieren  sozusagen  "infra  naturam."  Wenn  man  den  Dingen  die 
"perfectio"  und  den  "decor"  nimmt,  verlieren  sie  ihren  "animus."  Und  weiter 
lehrt  der  Dichter  nicht  nur  "plura,"  sondern  auch  "mehora,"  namUch  dasje- 
nige,  das,  weil  es  vollkommener  ist,  uns  angenehmer  ist.  Die  VoUkommen- 
heit  der  Poesie  weckt  unsere  Liebe  und  Bewunderung  und  auch  das  Gefiihl, 
dafi  etwas  Gottliches  in  unsere  Seele  eingeflossen  ist.  Darum  ist  der  Nutzen 
des  Dichters  unvergleichlich.  Ohne  die  Dichter  konnte  niemand  die  Schonhei- 
ten  der  Welt  kennen.  Der  Dichter  lehrt  die  lebendige,  atmende  Schonheit  der 
Welt. 

8.  Am  Schlufi  fafit  Fracastoro  das  Ziel  der  Dichtung  noch  einmal  meisterhaft 
in  einem  Satz  zusammen:  "poetae  finem  esse  delectare  et  prodesse  imitando 
in  unoquoque  maxima  et  pulcherrima  per  genus  dicendi  simpliciter  pulchrum 
ex  convenientibus." 

Zum  Schlufi  mochte  ich  noch  sagen,  dafi  bei  Fracastoro  die  Aufwertung 
der  Dichtkunst  ihren  Gipfel  erreicht  hat.  Eigentlich  ist  sie  nun  so  hoch  gestiegen, 
dafi  weit  unter  ihr,  im  alltaglichen  Getiimmel  dieser  Welt,  fiir  die  Fachwis- 
senschaften  ein  neuer  von  der  Dichtkunst  her  defmierter  Spielraum  entsteht, 
so  wie  zum  Beispiel  auch  Valla,  eben  durch  die  Transzendierung  der  latei- 
nischen  Sprache  zur  Idee,  den  Volkssprachen  eine  Moglichkeit  zur  Veredlung 
verleiht.  So  hat  auch  Fracastoro  selbst,  der  ja  Arzt  war,  nebst  seiner  Abhand- 
lung  liber  die  Poesie  und  seinem  hoch-poetischen  Epos  iiber  die  Syphilis,  auch 
medizinische  Traktate  (iber  ansteckende  Krankheiten  geschrieben.  Es  wird 
noch  eine  interessante  Aufgabe  fur  die  Literaturwissenschaft  sein,  die  Verhalt- 
nisse  zwischen  diesen  drei  Gruppen  von  Texten,  die  zu  drei  verschiedenen 
Textsorten  gehoren,  genau  festzustellen. 

Es  hat  mir  die  Zeit  gefehlt,  in  Scaliger's  gelehrtes  Buch  tiefer  einzudringen. 
Er  kennt  das  Lehrgedicht  und  nimmt  es  in  sein  System  auf,  auch  wenn  er  es 
verschmaht  hat,  soweit  ich  sehe,  der  Gattung  einen  Namen  zu  verleihen.  Im 
zweiten  Kapitel  des  ersten  Buches  unterscheidet  er  die  Dichter  nach  dem  Stoff, 
und  dann  gibt  es  auch  eine  Gruppe  "Philosophen,"  wozu  ein  "genus  Naturale," 
gehort  (Empedocles,  Nicander,  Aratus,  Lucretius)  und  ein  "genus  Morale," 
weiter  unterteilt  in  ein  "genus  Politicum"  (Solon,  Tyrtaeus),  "Oeconomicon" 
(Hesiod)  und  "Commune"  (Phocyllides,  Theognis,  Pythagoras).  Vergil's  Geor- 
gica  gehoren  offenbar  nicht  in  diese  Philosophenklasse.  Man  bekommt,  wenn 
man  weiter  in  Scaliger's  Buch  blattert,  den  Eindruck,  dafi  er  eigentlich  doch 
hauptsachlich  an  der  Verstechnik  interessiert  ist.  Wenn  er  spater  (VI,  S.  315) 


F.   AKKERMAN  417 

ausfiihrlich  iiber  Fracastoro  spricht,  tut  er  nichts  weiter  2ils  kleine  Einzelheiten 
zu  kritisieren,  obwohl  er  ihn  sehr  bewundert.  Die  faszinierenden  Ausein- 
andersetzungen  Fracastoro's  iiber  Poesie  hat  er  leider  nicht  weitergefuhrt,  und 
dessen  Poesie  auch  nicht  wirklich  gewiirdigt. 


Anmerkungen 


1.  Ich  babe  die  folgenden  Ausgaben  benutzt:  Boccaccio:  P.  G.  Ricci,  Giovanni  Boc- 
caccio in  der  Reihe  La  Letteratura  Italiana,  Storia  e  Testi,  vol.  9,  Milano,  Napoli  1965; 
Pontaino:  Giovanni  Pontano,  Dialoge,  Humanistische  Bibliothek,  Reihe  II.  Texte,  Band 
15,  Fink,  Miinchen  1984;  Vida:  die  Ausgabe  der  Poemata  Omnia  von  1731  bei  J.  Co- 
minus,  Padua,  vol.  II;  Fracastoro:  Naugerius  sive  de  Poetica  Dialogus,  Text,  iibersetzt  von 
R.  Kelso,  Einl.  von  M.  W.  Bundy,  Urbana,  Illinois  1924;  Scaliger:  Poetices  Libri  Sep- 
tem,  hrsg.  v.  A.  Buck,  Stuttgart-Bad  Cannstatt  1964. 

2.  Wenigstens  iiber  die  Satire  setzt  die  Theorieformung  viel  friiher  ein  als  iiber 
das  Lehrgedicht:  Poliziano,  Beroaldo,  Petrus  Montanus.  Aber  eben  iiber  die  Satire 
hatte  auch  das  Altertum  viel  mehr  nachgedacht. 

3.  Vgl.  B.  Effe,  Dichtung  und  Lehre,  Munchen  1977,  20-21. 

4.  B.  Fabian,  "Das  Lehrgedicht  als  Problem  der  Poetik,"  in  H.  R.  Jauss  (Hg.),  Die 
nicht  mehr  schbnen  Kiinste,  Poetik  und  Hermeneutik  3,  Munchen  1968,  S.  89. 

5.  Verg.  Aen.  3.  570  ff. 

6.  Die  Metamorphosen  sind  also  fiir  Pontano  ein  Lehrgedicht,  wenigstens  in  dieser 
Partie,  ebenso  gut  wie  die  Aeneis  in  der  Beschreibung  des  Aetna. 

7.  Vida  I,  149-78.  Es  sieht  so  aus,  als  vermeide  er  den  Namen  Lukrez  absichdich. 

8.  Auch  Vida  hat  einen  Passus  iiber  die  Nachfolge  der  Natur  in  der  Kunst  (II, 
455-95),  aber  die  Imitation  ist  auch  aus  Horaz  bekannt  {A. P.  318). 


Erzahlen  und  Beschreiben  im 
neulateinischen  Lehrgedicht 

Georg  Roellenbleck 

Die  Frage  nach  "Erzahlen"  und  "Beschreiben"  gehort  zu  den  grofieren 
Fragen  nach  den  Darstellungsformen,  die  im  neulateinischen  Lehr- 
gedicht Verwendung  finden  und  dessen  "Lehre"  begriinden  und  ver- 
anschaulichen  soUen.  Es  geht  2ilso  nicht  um  eine  textlinguistische  Aspekt- 
Untersuchung  (im  Sinne  von  H.  Weinrichs  "Tempus''-Buch,  Stuttgart^  1964), 
mit  deren  Hilfe  innerhalb  einer  sprachlichen  Handlungsdarstellung  zwischen 
"Besprechen"  und  "Erzahlen"  differenziert  wird.  Ein  solcher  Ansatz  wiirde  den 
Gegenstand  nur  dann  zu  erhellen  vermogen,  wenn  die  Gedichte  ganz  oder 
zu  wesentlichen  Teilen  als  Erzahlungen  strukturiert  waren.  Wie  sich  zeigen 
wird,  ist  gerade  dies  in  der  hier  betrachteten  Literatur  jedoch  nicht  der  Fall. 

Im  Gegenteil:  die  (implizite)  Poetik  der  Imitation  fiihrt  die  Autoren  viel- 
mehr  zu  einer  Beschrankung  ihrer  Darstellungsmittel  auf  die  im  antiken  Lehr- 
gedicht erscheinenden,  d.  h.  zu  der  Einordnung  von  Erzahlung  (als 
Mythen-oder  Beispielerzahlung)  und  Beschreibung  (als  Ekphrasis)  in  die  Reihe 
der  Verfahren,  die  in  ihrer  Anwendung  den  Gesetzen  der  Rhetorik  (unter  dem 
Stichwort  Elocutio)  unterliegen.  In  dieser  Reihe  nehmen  sie  keineswegs  eine 
hervorragende  Stelle  ein. 

Es  dominiert  der  Sachvortrag,  den  aufier  dem  Vers  vor  allem  die  reiche  Ver- 
wendung von  Figuren  von  der  Prosa  der  Handbiicher  (denen  die  Gedichte 
in  ihrer  Anlage  meist  folgen)  unterscheidet.  Hier  konnen  Texte  von  bedeu- 
tender  Schonheit  entstehen  (Pontano,  Vida,  Fracastoro,  Palingenius);  freilich 
mufi  sich  der  Leser,  um  sie  zu  erfassen  und  zu  beurteilen,  auf  eine  andere  Hier- 
archic der  literarischen  Ausdrucks-  und  Erlebniswerte  einstellen. 

Da  hier  zum  Zweck  der  Verdeutlichung  nur  die  grofien  Linien  herausgear- 
beitet  worden  sind  und  keine  naheren  Textangaben  gemacht  werden,  darf  ich 
fur  Einzelheiten  auf  meine  Darstellung  Das  epische  Lehrgedicht  Italiens  im  15.  und 
16.  Jahrhundert  (Miinchen  1975)  sowie,  was  die  Geschichte  der  dichtungsthe- 
oretischen  Reflexion  betrifft,  auf  Bemhard  Fabian,  "Das  Lehrgedicht  als  Prob- 
lem der  Poetik"  in  Die  nicht  mehr  schonen  Kiinste  (Poetik  und  Hermeneutik  III, 
Miinchen  1968),  verweisen. 


420  ERZAHLEN  UND  BESCHREIBEN 

Die  folgenden  Uberlegungen  beschranken  sich  auf  die  italienischen  Ge- 
dichte  des  15.  und  16.  Jahrhunderts.  Nur  hier  gibt  es,  soviel  ich  sehe,  ein 
umfang-und  formenreiches  Corpus  neulateinischer  Lehrdichtung,  und  vor  allem 
haben  wir  es  nur  hier  mit  der  autonomen  Entwicklung  einer  neulateinischen 
Literatur  ohne  Beziige  zu  anderen  nachantiken  Literaturen  und  vor  allem  ohne 
Beziige,  ja  teilweise  in  direktem  Widerspiel  zu  den  entsprechenden  Texten 
und  Schreibformen  der  Vulgarsprache  zu  tun. 

Erzahlung  und  Beschreibung  als  — in  ihrer  Funktion  zu  bestimmende — 
Elemente  von  didaktischer  Poesie:  die  Poetiken  sagen  dazu  nichts  aus.  Wie 
bekannt,  gibt  es  von  der  Antike  bis  zur  Renaissance  keine  durchformulierte 
Poetik  der  Gattung  (auch  der  Gattungsbegriff  selbst  ist  hier  ja  problematisch); 
und  wo  sich  poetologische  Aussagen  zu  ihr  finden,  haben  sie  andere  Fragen 
im  Auge.  Im  iibrigen  ist  ja  erst  das  16.  Jhdt.  die  Epoche  der  literarischen 
Theoriediskussion;  die  wesentlichen  Formentscheidungen  der  Lehrdichtung 
fallen  jedoch  in  die  Zeit  vor  deren  Einsetzen. 

Es  sind  also  die  Texte  selbst  zu  befragen.  Hier  ist  das  Bild,  synchron  wie 
diachron,  hochst  uneinheitlich.  Die  Formgeschichte  zeigt,  dafi  es  keine  zwin- 
gende  Tradition,  keine  autoritativen  Realisierungen  gibt,  die  eine  normative 
Wirkung  in  grofierem  Umfang  hatten  ausiiben  konnen.  Im  Zuge  der  Ge- 
samtentwicklung  der  Literatur  in  dieser  Epoche  erkennt  man  eine  deutliche 
Bewegung  vom  versifizierten  Traktat  oder  Handbuch  hin  zu  mehr  Epennahe, 
und  dann  ein  Auslaufen  ins  kleine  Format,  ins  Genre;  eine  Entwicklung  also 
im  Sinne  einer  starkeren  Durchformung  des  Lehrgedichts  als  geschlossenes 
literarisches  Kunstwerk.  Aber  auch  dieser  Befund  deckt  nicht  die  gesamte  Pro- 
duktion:  die  "Handbuch-Linie"  lauft  daneben  ungemindert  und  mit  bedeu- 
tenden  Texten  weiter. 

Mit  der  Thematik  steht  es  ebenso:  zu  alien  Zeiten  zwischen  dem  Einsetzen 
lateinischer  Lehrdichtung  in  der  1 .  Halfte  des  15.  und  ihrem  Verebben  in  der 
zweiten  Halfte  des  16.  Jhdts.  stehen  hohe  Themen,  "Urthemen"  der  Lehr- 
dichtung, und  kleine  Detailthematiken  nebeneinander. 

Wo  haben  Erzahlen  und  Beschreiben  im  Lehrgedicht  ihren  Platz?  Das  ist 
auch  eine  Frage  der  nachgebildeten  Modelle,  unter  denen  vor  allem  Lukrez 
und  Vergil,  aber  auch  etwa  Manilius  zu  nennen  sind.  Hier  ist,  wieder  analog 
zu  dem  oben  Vermerkten,  festzustellen,  dafi  die  Linie  keineswegs  einsinnig 
auf  eine  Kanonisierung  des  Georgicatypus  hinauslauft,  sondern  dafi  neben  die- 
sem  der  Alexandrinismus  Pontanos  wie  der  Handbuchtypus  gut  vertreten  sind. 

AUe  diese  Typen  konvergieren,  was  unser  Thema  betrifft,  darin,  dafi  Erzah- 
len und  Beschreiben  in  ihnen,  aufier  in  einem  Punkt,  gerade  keine  feste  Rolle 
spielen.  Beschreibungen  fmden  sich,  falls  und  wo  und  in  welchem  Mafi  es  der 
Autor  zur  Illustration  seines  Gegenstands  fiir  erforderlich  oder  reizvoll  halt; 
und  genauso  erscheinen  Erzahlungen  nur  in  den  (relativ  seltenen)  Fallen,  in 
denen  eine  Darlegung  durch  einen  Erfahrungsbericht  verdeutlicht  werden  soil. 
Der  genannte  Punkt  der  Ausnahme  ist  die  Mythenerzahlung,  besonders  der 


GEORG  ROELLENBLECK  42I 

Schlufimythos  des  Georgicatypus  (ich  komme  darauf  zuriick),  der  das  Thema 
durch  den  Bericht  von  seinen  Urspriingen  als  konstitutiv  fur  die  Welterfah- 
rung  der  Gemeinschaft  und  damit  als  hervorragend  poesiewiirdig  ausweist. 

Was  es  in  der  neulateinischen  Lehrdichtung— mit  einer  Ausnahme  —  gerade 
nicht  gibt,  das  ist  die  Organisation  des  gesamten  Gedichts  durch  eine  einzige 
durchlaufende  Handlung.  (Die  Ausncihme  ist  Vidas  Schachepyllion,  bezeichnen- 
derweise  eine  Epenparodie.)  Das  hangt,  wenn  ich  richtig  sehe,  mit  einer  zen- 
tralen  Pramisse  der  neulateinischen  Literatur  Italiens  zusammen,  namlich  mit 
ihrer  konsequenten  Trennung  von  alien  wesentlichen  Aspekten  der  volkssprach- 
lichen  Tradition.  In  unserem  Fall  bedeutet  das  die  Wendung  gegen  den  (auch 
in  Italien  wirksamen)  Rosenroman  und  gegen  Dante,  besonders  gegen  den  letz- 
teren,  bei  dem  ja  alle  "Lehre"  durch  das  Lehrgesprach  zwischen  Lehrendem 
und  Lernendem  vermittelt  ist,  und  bei  dem  der  Handlungsverlauf  der  visio- 
naren  Erfahrungsreise  das  Formprinzip  des  Gedichts  darstellt. 

Ein  solches  Bauprinzip  fehlt  in  der  hier  betrachteten  Literatur  voUig;  sic 
kennt  nur  den  Lehrer,  nicht  aber  auch  den  Lernenden  als  im  Gedicht  an- 
wesende  Figur,  und  sie  sieht  im  Lehrgedicht  (mit  der  Ausnahme  von  De  rerum 
natura  und  seinen  Nachfolgern)  meistens  mehr  ein  Mittel  der  verniinftigen  Dar- 
legung,  als  der  leidenschaftlichen  Werbung;  wenn  sie  nicht  das  ganze  Inter- 
esse  auf  eine  Sprachkunst  richtet,  die  die  Schonheit  des  schonen  oder  die 
Poesiefahigkeit  des  hafilichen,  des  sproden  Gegenstands  vermitteln  soil.  Es 
ist  vielleicht  kein  Zufall,  dafi  unter  den  neulateinischen  Lehrdichtern  kaum 
Toskaner  sind:  hier  hat  sich  das  Schreiben  in  Volgare  friiher  als  anderswo 
durchgesetzt,  nicht  zuletzt  gerade  im  Anschlufi  an  Dante.  Zu  den  Griinden 
fur  dieses  Ausblenden  der  vulgarsprachlichen  Formen  gehort  sicher,  dafi  au- 
fierhalb  des  hohen  episch-mythischen  Bereichs  das  Erzahlen  keine  zentrale  Ka- 
tegorie  der  lateinischen  Literatur  ist;  weswegen  es  in  der  neulateinischen 
Versliteratur  auch  fast  ganzlich  fehlt. 

So  sind  Erzahlen  und  Beschreiben  fiir  das  neulateinische  Lehrgedicht  also 
zweifellos  nur  Sekundarelemente,  deren  Heranziehung  ganz  den  Gesetzen  der 
die  Lehrdarlegung  ubiquitar  beherrschenden  Rhetorik  unterliegt.  Deren  Kunst- 
mittel,  bzw.  ihre  Hierarchic  der  Kunstmittel  ist  es,  nach  denen  das  Lehrge- 
dicht gestaltet  wird.  Primar  ist  die  sachliche  Klarheit  in  der  Darlegung  des 
Gegenstands  oder  Gedankens;  die  "Umsetzung  ins  Poetische,"  die  sinnliche 
Verdeutlichung  bleibt  ihr  gegeniiber  fakultativ,  akzessorisch,  und  richtet  sich 
nach  den  Topoi  oder  den  sachlichen  Erfordernissen.  Die  von  Burckhardt  fiir 
die  Renaissancekultur  vermerkte  Lust  an  der  wohlgeformten  Rede  scheint  auch 
diese  Formgeschichte  zu  erklaren  und  unsere  asthetischen  Forderungen  nach 
"Bewegung"  und  "Erlebnis"  unter  die  Anachronismen  zu  verweisen. 

Auch  das  Als  Ob  der  Lehrdichtung  (d.  h.  eine  Auseinandersetzung  mit  dem 
Fiktionscharakter  von  Poesie  iiberhaupt  und,  als  dessen  Konsequenz,  mit  der 
Problematik  referentieller  Beziige  im  Lehrgedicht)  ist  in  der  lateinischen  Li- 
teratur offenbar  kein  Thema,  Jedenfalls  erkennt  man  kein  Bediirfnis,  durch 


422  ERZAHLEN   UND  BESCHREIBEN 

massive  Umsetzung  der  Stoffe  in  Erzahlung  und  Beschreibung  Zweifeln  an 
der  Legitimitat  von  Lehren  durch  Dichtung  zu  begegnen.  Die  "Poetizitat"  der 
Lehrdichtung  wird  —  trotz  den  aristotelischen  Bedenken  gegen  blofi  versifizierte 
Traktate,  Poetik  1447  b  — nirgends  bestritten;  es  gab  ja  fiir  jeden  Typ  antike 
Mustertexte.  Die  neulateinischen  Gedichte  sind  Lektiiren  fiir  Laien,  denen 
der  Absinthbecher  versiiftt  werden  soil;  aber  offenbar  mufi  das  nicht  notwen- 
dig  auf  dem  Weg  des  Erzahlens  oder  Beschreibens  geschehen.  Dasselbe  gilt 
fiir  das  genannte  Moment  des  virtuosen  Anschreibens  gegen  einen  extrem  wi- 
derstandigen  Stoff— etwa  die  Syphilis:  hier  werden  sdmtliche  Pairameter  der 
kunstvollen  Rede  herangezogen. 

Erzahlen  (episch,  mythisch)  und  Beschreiben  (als  Gleichnis  oder  als  Ek- 
phrasis)  sind  Elemente  des  hohen  Stils,  aber  das  Lehrgedicht  gehort  eben  nicht 
zum  hohen  Bezirk,  auch  wenn  es  sich  diesem  im  Mafie  seiner  Episierung  nach 
dem  Muster  Vergils  im  Lauf  der  Zeit  annahert  —  das  meistbefolgte  Modell 
bleibt  das  Handbuch.  Es  gibt  kein  Formproblem  Lehrgedicht,  es  gibt  nur  eine 
Vielzahl  von  Varianten  einiger  weniger  Mustertexte. 

Im  Gesamt  aller  neueren  Lehrdichtung  gesehen  liegen  Erzahlen  und  Be- 
schreiben natiirlich  nicht  auf  einer  und  derselben  Ebene.  Wahrend  das  Be- 
schreiben in  ihr  immer  Sekundarkategorie  bleiben  mufi,  ist  die  Frage  nach 
der  Stellung  der  Erzahlung,  wie  der  Fall  Dantes  bzw.  seine  Ausblendung  im 
neulateinischen  didaktischen  Epos  zeigt,  eine  Frage  nach  der  Grundkonzep- 
tion  der  Gattung  iiberhaupt. 

Bei  alledem  ist  der  diachronische  Aspekt  im  Auge  zu  behalten,  die  — in  der 
neulateinischen  Literatur  allerdings  niemals  dramatische  — Entwicklung,  das 
also,  was  vorher  als  Tendenz  hin  zur  Durch gestaltung  des  Lehrgedichts  nach 
den  Eigengesetzen  des  Sprachkunstwerks  bezeichnet  wurde;  welche  Tendenz 
in  manchen  Fallen  auch  zu  einer  deutlichen  Episierung  gefiihrt  hat.  Es  gibt 
gerade  unter  den  bedeutendsten  Werken  Beispiele  fiir  eine  Massierung  von 
Erzahlung  oder  Beschreibung.  So  folgt  etwa  Pontano  in  der  Urania  zwar  dem 
Handbuchschema,  reiht  aber  iiber  weite  Strecken  durch  ad  hoc  erfundene 
Mythen  legitimierte,  hochst  farbige  Szenen  ganz  unterschiedlichen  Charak- 
ters  aneinander.  Fracastoro  dagegen  sucht  in  den  zwei  Redaktionen  seiner  ^- 
philis  immer  mehr  die  Nahe  zum  Epos:  er  verdoppelt  die  Mythenerzahlung 
vom  Ursprung  der  Heilmittel  und  gestaltet  sie  im  zweiten  Fall  zu  einer  Art 
Epyllion  von  der  Entdeckung  Amerikas  aus.  In  einem  hochinteressanten  Brief 
hat  Bembo  dieses  Verfahren  als  ungliicklich  kritisiert  und  dabei  auf  das  verfiih- 
rerische,  mit  einer  klassizistischen  Asthetik  nicht  vereinbare  Beispiel  Ponta- 
nos  verwiesen:  die  Multiplizierung  und  Ausweitung  zum  Formprinzip  von 
Elementen,  die  nur  Schmuck,  Illustration  oder  Kronung  sein  soUen,  ist  nach 
ihm  kein  geeignetes  Mittel,  das  Lehrgedicht  fur  den  modernen  Geschmack 
aufzubereiten. 

Palingenius  wiederum  ist  von  derartigen  Erwagungen  ganz  unberiihrt. 
Schon  seine  Verwerfung  des  blofi  Dichterischen  und  sein  intensiver  Sprich- 


GEORG  ROELLENBLECK  423 

wortgebrauch  zeigen,  dafi  er  keine  iibergeordneten  Gesichtspunkte  der  Form 
gelten  lafit.  Bei  ihm  finden  sich  hochst  eindrucksvoUe  Erzahlungen  und  Be- 
schreibungen,  aber  gerade  je  nach  Thema  und  Ergiebigkeit  und  ohne  jede  glie- 
dernde  Ordnung. 

Den  Zweifel  an  den  Moglichkeiten  des  Lehrgedichts,  der  dann  das  Ende 
der  Gattung  herbeifiihrt,  impliziert  erst  das  Verfahren  Giordano  Brunos,  der 
in  einem  und  demselben  Werk  Prosa  und  Vers  abwechseln  lafit  und  beiden 
unterschiedliche  Aufgaben  zuweist. 

Das  Lehrgedicht,  das  in  der  zweiten  Jahrhunderthalfte  keine  grofien  The- 
men  mehr  aufgreift,  wendet  sich  am  Ende  mehr  und  mehr  dem  Beschreiben 
des  Kleinen,  des  Idyllischen  zu.  Damit  gerat  es  zwischen  die  Miihlsteine  ei- 
nerseits  der  neuen  Naturwissenschaft,  fiir  die  die  schone  Beschreibung  kein 
wissenschafdiches  Verfahren  mehr  sein  kann,  und  andererseits  der  neuen  U- 
terarischen  Sensibilitat,  fiir  die  auch  das  lange  Gedicht  cds  autonome  Form 
und  durch  ein  erlebendes  Ich  oder  durch  einen  souveranen  Erzahler  orga- 
nisiert  werden  mufi.  Das  Haufen  von  Beschreibungen  bedeutet  Formauflo- 
sung,  Reihung  statischer  Einzelmomente,  statt  organischem  Aufbau  in 
durchgehender  Bewegung.  In  dieser  letzteren  Kunst  aber  war  das  lateinische 
Schreiben  langst  vom  Volgare  (Ariost)  iiberholt  worden. 


The  Scacchia  Indus  of  Marco  Girolamo  Vida 
The  Didactic  Poem  as  Fictional  Text 


Mario  A.  Di  Cesare 


'^    I    ^] 


he  first  of  Vida's  major  poems,  the  Scacchia  Indus  was  published  in 
I  its  orthodox  version  in  1527,  the  year  of  the  Sack  of  Rome.  By  this 
M  time,  the  author  was  already  widely  respected  as  a  poet,  he  had  aban- 
doned secular  composition,  and  he  was  living  at  the  priory  of  San  Silvestro 
in  Frascati,  revising  his  major  work,  the  epic  Christiad}  In  his  riper  years  Vida 
referred  to  this  poem  as  "meae  adulescentiae  lusus  .  .  .  de  re  ludicra,"  an  en- 
tertainment which  brought  him  to  the  attention  of  Pope  Leo  X  and  won  him 
the  commission  to  write  his  epic  Christiad}  The  Scacchia  Indus  became  his  most 
popular  and  widely  read  poem,  described  as  a  "prety  and  pleasant  poem"  (G.B. , 
1597)  as  well  as  "Ein  Kiinstlich,  Erbar,  unnd  lustig  Spiel"  to  be  commended 
to  "der  studierenden  Jugend"  (Wielius,  1606).  J.  H.  Alstedt,  printing  the  en- 
tire 658  hexameters  in  less  than  five  pages  of  his  redoubtable  Encyclopedia  (1630), 
located  the  poem  in  the  section  Mechanologia  Mathematica,  subsection  "Paedeu- 
tica,"  on  the  grounds  that  "Ludus  scacchiae  imprimis  acuit  ingenium;  et  proinde 
liberalibus  convenit  ingeniis."^ 

For  these  seventeenth-century  editors,  certainly,  the  poem  is  clearly  didac- 
tic. One  can  assume  that  the  didactic  gloss  contributed  to  (though  it  did  not 
account  for)  the  poem's  immense  popularity.  It  was  the  most  frequently  printed 
and  translated  of  all  Vida's  works.  The  Scacchia  was  translated  more  often  than 
both  the  more  famous  Ars  poetica  and  Christiad  together:  seventeen  times  into 
Italian,  eleven  times  into  German,  ten  into  English,  five  into  French,  twice 
into  Dutch,  and  once  each  into  Polish  and  Portuguese.  Literary  figures  as  di- 
verse as  Marino  and  Pope  found  the  poem  worth  imitating,  and  the  great  Polish 
poet  Jan  Kochanowski  made  a  famous  adaptation-translation  within  thirty  years 
after  the  first  publication.'^ 

Vida's  poem  was  praised  as  much  by  chess  devotees  as  by  readers  with  little 
or  no  interest  in  the  game.  The  translations  by  Johann  David  Miiller  (Frank- 
furt, 1772),  J.  B.  Levee  (Paris,  1809),  Francesco  Domenichelli  (Jesi,  1810), 
and  Alexander  Baldi  (Berlin,  1873)  find  the  jollity  in  the  game  of  chess  itself. 


426  THE   SCACCHIA  LUDUS  OF  VIDA 

However,  the  translation  allegedly  made  by  Oliver  Goldsmith  is  spry  and  mock- 
ing, a  good  example  of  how  highly  developed  mock-heroic  form  became  in 
eighteenth-century  England.  Richard  Stanton  Lambert's  1921  version  achieves 
a  subtle  tone  of  "mock-heroic  strife"  partly  because  he  combines  a  decent  de- 
tachment from  the  game  with  his  affection  for  it.^ 

J.  C.  Scaliger  in  his  brash  way  commented  on  the  poem:  "Inventio  non  in- 
epta:  juvenilis  tamen,  et  quae  interdum  officiat  decoro:  re  rum  vero  elocutio 
felicissimi  ingenii  est."  But  Francesco  Flamini's  laconic  comment,  "e  uscito 
egregiamente!"  — is  more  to  the  point,  as  is  Giuseppe  Toffanin's:  "Nello  Scacchia 
Indus  un  brivido  di  sorriso  illumina  il  contrasto  fra  la  sostenutezza  del  tono  e 
la  frivolita  del  contenuto."^  Vida  sings  in  well-tuned  verse  "effigiem  belli," 
what  in  riper  years  he  called  "versus  .  .  .  de  re  ludicra,  sed  non  parum  difficili, 
at  que  involuta."  The  verses  flow  smoothly;  the  action,  clearly  marked,  spark- 
les at  times  under  his  deft  touch.  If  Vida  insists  on  a  large  freedom,  the  first 
word  warns  us  fairly:  "Ludimus."  In  the  end  the  game  does  count,  but  this 
is  the  game  as  played  by  the  players  Mercury  and  Apollo  and,  in  their  lesser 
way,  by  Venus,  Mars,  Vulcan,  and  Jupiter.  The  work  then  is  both  didactic 
and  narrative;  the  interrelationship  between  these  characteristics  is  not  easily 
delineated. 

The  poem  itself  may  be  usefully  summarized.  The  Scacchia  Indus  celebrates 
the  invention  of  the  game  at  the  court  of  Memnon  in  Ethiopia  during  the  mar- 
riage of  Oceanus  and  Terra.  After  the  banquet,  Oceanus  brings  out  a  board 
and  a  set  of  boxwood  figures,  and  explains  the  ground  rules  to  his  guests,  de- 
scribing in  detail  the  movements  of  the  pieces.  For  a  first  trial,  Jupiter  selects 
Apollo  and  Mercury.  The  early  stages  of  the  game  are  enlivened  by  the  con- 
trast between  Apollo's  wholesale  assaults  and  Mercury's  apparent 
clumsiness  — Mercury  moves  at  random,  sometimes  blundering  awfully.  But 
Mercury  has  been  developing  a  broad  strategy;  the  ensuing  setbacks  to  Apollo 
make  him  more  cautious.  Then  confusion  over  protocol  regarding  the  Queen 
throws  Mercury  off  balance;  his  vindictive  counter-attack  fails  and  he  attempts 
to  bluff,  but  that  also  fails.  Next,  he  cheats,  until  Apollo  detects  him.  Having 
angered  and  confused  Mercury,  Apollo  nearly  manages  to  corner  the  King 
with  his  white  Queen,  when  the  black  Queen  races  in  to  the  defense.  At  this 
point.  Mars  clumsily  attempts  to  interfere  by  reactivating  some  of  Mercury's 
pieces,  but  he  is  caught  by  Vulcan,  and  Mercury  must  retract  some  illegiti- 
mate moves.  Shortly,  Apollo's  white  Queen  slays  the  black  Queen;  in  the  nick 
of  time,  maiden  pawns  join  the  regal  ranks,  a  successful  ruse  by  Mercury  up- 
sets Apollo's  calculations  and  his  complacency,  and  a  series  of  shrewd  moves 
gives  Mercury  the  game.  The  poem  concludes  with  the  god  teaching  the  game 
to  the  nymph  Scacchis,  as  consolation  for  her  lost  virginity. 

It  must  be  emphasized  here  that  thisjVu  d'esprit,  as  it  can  too  easily  seem, 
was  actually  the  fruit  of  labors  spanning  many  years.  We  know  this  from  the 
manuscripts.  Besides  the  authorized  version  published  in  1527,  there  are  ex- 


MARIO  A.    DI   CESARE  427 

tant  three  early  versions  of  the  poem:  the  Belluno  fragment,  the  Madrid  man- 
uscript, and  a  penultimate  version  published  twice  in  the  1520s.  At  least  as 
early  as  1510,  and  most  likely  several  years  before  that,  Vida  had  planned  and 
drafted  the  poem;  the  300-line  fragment  at  Belluno^  begins  virtually  "ab  ovo," 
in  the  overthrow  of  Saturn  and  the  grief  which  Nature  feels  for  the  ending  of 
the  Saturnian  age.  Pitying  mankind,  the  gods  provide  oxen  and  plough;  men 
build  cities  and  inevitably  learn  to  make  war.  Peace  is  difficult;  men  seem  to 
need  an  outlet  for  their  fierce  instincts,  and  so  they  turn  to  games  of  war,  like 
chess.  The  intent  of  this  version  was  explicitly  didactic. 

The  next  version,  a  full-blown  work  of  820  lines,  much  longer  than  the  hnal 
version  and  perhaps  the  first  complete  draft  of  the  poem,  composed  sometime 
before  1512,  exists  in  a  manuscript  at  the  Biblioteca  Nacional,  Madrid.^  Be- 
tween this  version  and  the  final  is  yet  another  version,  which  had  wide  cur- 
rency, since  it  exists  in  a  British  Library  manuscript,  a  pirated  edition  (the 
only  known  copy  of  which  is  at  Wolfenbiittel),  and  an  edition  published  by 
Simon  de  Colines  at  Paris  in  1529.^  Both  of  these  intermediate  versions  give 
more  play  to  the  story,  less  to  the  morals  which  might  be  conveyed. ^^ 

In  what  ways  can  the  lesson-become-narrative  be  thought  didactic?  One  cri- 
tic likened  Vida  to  Ben  Franklin;  indeed,  several  passages  o\it  of  Franklin's 
charming  essay,  "The  Morals  of  Chess,"  are  very  apt.  For  instance:  chess  can 
teach  us  ''Foresight,  which  .  .  .  considers  the  consequences  that  may  attend  an 
action:  .  .  .  Circumspection,  which  surveys  the  whole  .  .  .  Caution,  not  to  make 
our  moves  too  hastily  .  .  .  And  lastly,  .  .  .  the  habit  of  hoping  for  a  favorable  change, 
and  that  oi  persevering  in  the  search  of  resources. ""^^  The  Belluno  draft,  as  we  have 
seen,  presents  the  game  as  a  sublimation  of  human  aggression,  an  outlet  for 
fiercer  instincts.  But  even  Vida  might  have  been  surprised  at  the  grim  elab- 
oration of  such  a  view  in  Ernest  Jones's  study  of  Paul  Morphy  (which  locates 
his  chess  playing  in  a  complex  of  anal-sadistic  fantasies)  or  in  Karl  Menning- 
er's  well-known  description  of  chess  players  as  individuals  intent  on  "murder- 
ous campaigns  of  patricide,  matricide,  fratricide,  regicide,  and  mayhem." 
Anecdotes  from  the  annals  of  chess  lore  sometimes  sound  like  life  imitating 
art.  ^2 

In  a  practical  way,  too,  Vida's  poem  has  been  thought  didactic.  According 
to  chess  historians,  the  game  entered  its  modern  phase  in  Europe  around  Vida's 
time.  H.J.  R.  Murray  and  others  suggest  that  Vida  helped  the  process  con- 
siderably. For  chess  historians,  the  most  noteworthy  changes  made  between 
the  four  versions  of  the  poem  are  those  in  terminology.  Among  other  things, 
Vida  influenced  nomenclature  for  the  Bishop  and  the  Rook.  What  we  call  the 
Rook  was  originally  a  Cyclops.  The  final  version  presents  figures  at  once  more 
recognizable  and  more  exotic  —  warring  towers  supported  by  elephants.  "The 
extraordinary  thing,"  says  Murray,  "is  that  Vida's  choice  of  names  should  have 
caught  the  popular  fancy.  All  three  terms  — Archer  for  the  Bishop,  Elephant 
and  Tower  (Castle)  for  the  Rook  — were  adopted  by  players  in  different  parts 


428  *  THE  SCACCHIA  LUDUS  OF  VIDA 

of  Western  Europe.  Even  the  term  Amazon,  which  he  used  occasionally  for 
the  Queen,  was  tried  by  the  writers  of  chess  books. "^^  It  might  also  be  noted 
that  several  elements  are  pointedly  propaedeutic:  Oceanus's  opening  speech 
provides  a  moderately  successful  exposition  of  pieces  and  rules;  the  opening 
gambit  is  recognizable;  such  processes  as  the  winning  of  new  queens  are 
presented  clearly;  stalemate  is  described  neatly  and  well  (613  f.). 

Nonetheless,  a  chess  player  might  be  dismayed  by  the  turn  of  events  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  poem:  at  one  point  (494),  Apollo  has  clear  superiority,  with 
Queen,  Castle,  Archer,  and  two  pawns  against  Mercury's  Archer,  Knight,  and 
three  pawns,  and  Mercury's  attempt  to  turn  his  "fida  famula"  into  a  Queen 
is  totally  stymied.  Technically,  I  am  told,  Apollo  has  nineteen  points  to  Mer- 
cury's nine,  a  lead  which  is  invincible,  and  therefore  would  need  a  good  deal 
of  folly  to  lose.  But  that  is  precisely  the  point,  or  rather  the  joke.  Mercury  wins 
by  playing  a  very  good  kind  of  bad  chess.  When  Apollo  unwittingly  has  the 
Queen  located  for  a  quick  victory,  Mercury  bluffs  and  berates  him  for  being 
so  slow.  But  Apollo,  grinning  broadly,  "imprudens,"  shows  Mercury:  he  takes 
another  pawn  to  increase  his  lead.  Breathing  easier.  Mercury,  with  a  deft  ser- 
ies of  moves,  saves  his  King,  traps  the  Castle,  and  wins  a  Queen.  Later,  when 
Apollo,  pursuing  a  policy  of  brute  strength,  attacks  the  King  with  his  Queen, 
Mercury  easily  fends  him  off  and  then  traps  him  in  a  dilemma:  lose  either  Queen 
or  King.  Mercury  loses  a  Knight,  but  that  does  not  matter,  for  he  knows  how 
to  use  his  Queen:  in  a  matter  of  moments,  Apollo's  remaining  warriors  go 
down  — the  Bishop  and  both  pawns.  The  game  is  over. 

And  chess?  Antonio  Belloni  (who  called  Vida's  poem  "il  piu  notevole"  among 
Renaissance  "poemetti  mitologici")  sought  "intento  didascalico"  and  complained 
that  he  could  not  fmd  it:  "ma  .  .  .  non  abbiamo  imparato  a  giocare  agli  scac- 
chi!"'*  In  the  game,  there  are  numerous  vagaries;  a  score-keeper  would  fmd 
himself  hard  put.  At  line  264,  Apollo  loses  both  of  his  knights,  then  loses  yet 
another  one  at  333.  Mercury  has  one  Archer  remaining  at  the  regrouping  of 
forces  (426  f.)  — even  though  he  clearly  lost  one  in  335  and  the  other  at  355! 
(Let  us  pass  over  in  respectful  silence  the  mountains  of  carnage  on  the  bat- 
tlefield.) Murray's  remark  is  admirable  understatement:  "Vida's  description  of 
the  moves  and  rules,  and  the  game  .  .  .  contains  nothing  of  material  impor- 
tance" (p.  793). 

The  manuscript  evidence  suggests  that  Vida's  deliberate  fiction  started  out 
as  something  of  a  versified  treatise,  with  various  embellishments  somewhat  me- 
chanically used.  But  he  perceived  the  incongruity  of,  for  instance,  the  lengthy 
invocation  interrupting  so  short  a  work,  and  later  saw  the  formal  possibilities 
in  the  myth  of  Scacchis  dramatically  rendered.  The  poem  becomes  less  ob- 
viously didactic  and  sententious  from  version  to  version.  If  not  always  strictly 
chess,  the  fictive  contrivance  is  quite  remarkable.  Much  of  the  contriv2ince  came, 
openly  enough,  from  Vergil,  some  from  other  epic  poets.  The  general  form 
of  the  poem  in  its  final  version  is  a  single,  uncomplicated  story  of  local  de- 
rivation, with  clear  beginning,  middle,  aind  end. 


MARIO  A.    DI   CESARE  439 

Epic  elements  stand  out:  proposition  and  invocation;  speeches,  similes,  ce- 
lestial machinery;  conflict;  compressed  erudition.  Proposition  and  invocation 
are  purified  from  version  to  version;  the  speeches  are  set  pieces  and  so  func- 
tion neatly  as  parodies.  (Oceanus's,  for  instance,  follows  the  pattern  of  the  ca- 
nonical epic  catalogue.)  The  celestial  machinery  may  be  seen,  mockingly,  in 
the  necrophiliac  simile  of  397  f. ,  which  recalls  some  of  Lucan's  more  grotesque 
effects.  Homer  was  also  present  in  the  author's  study:  coquettish  eye-flicking 
Venus,  arrogant  warlike  Mars,  and  pompously  self-righteous  Vulcan  (evok- 
ing Uncle  Poseidon  of  Odyssey  VIII)  catching  Mars  redhanded  and  denounc- 
ing him  to  Jove.  Impartial  severe  Jove  parodies  the  pater  omnipotens  who  favors 
neither  Trojan  nor  Rutulian  {Aen.  X.  7  f.),  while  the  Amazon  Queen  at  times 
recalls,  inevitably,  Vergil's  Camilla. 

From  version  to  version,  Vida  tightened  while  simplifying  the  organization 
of  his  poem.  One  could  cite  detailed  evidence,  but  suffice  it  here  to  say  that 
the  final  version  is  considerably  leaner  and  more  elegantly  simple  than  any 
of  the  earlier  versions.  In  the  structure  of  the  final  version,  Vida  establishes 
a  particular  relationship  between  the  chessboard/battiefield  and  the  gods  sit- 
ting around  it.  We  are  reminded  of  this  framework  at  the  end  of  the  game, 
when  Mercury's  Queen  slays  Apollo's  King  and  her  act  is  accompanied  by  a 
divine  outburst:  "Ingenti  superum  plausu,  et  clzimore  secundo"  (635).  The  hd\- 
ance  is  very  neat. 

After  the  fun  is  over,  the  most  telling  points  about  the  poem  are  surely  the 
subtle  structure  creating  and  supporting  the  genial  mockery  and  the  exquisite 
tone  that  informs  it.  The  Scacchia  indicates  also  a  growing  classical  sense  on 
Vida's  part,  a  sense  he  could  not  always  articulate.  (He  does  exemplify  the 
rule  that  poets  seldom  follow  their  own  precepts.)  The  poem  achieves  its  best 
effects  without  advertizing  them;  it  shows  a  growing  sense  of  the  possibilites 
of  allusion,  for  instance,  or  of  parody.  Even  when  Vida  indulges  mythogra- 
phy,  the  successive  versions  show  him  purifying  the  process,  sanitizing  myth 
so  to  speak. 

Such  revision  suggests  the  classical  purity  Vida  sought.  He  avoids  stylistic 
bathos  by  regularly  conducting  us  from  the  fictive  battleground  to  the  disor- 
derly world  around  it;  his  contrivance  preserves  an  important  balance.  The 
structure  of  the  poem  works  both  as  a  frame  to  define  the  various  actions  and 
as  a  controlling  device  to  keep  the  actions  in  balance  with  the  tone.  Let  me 
note  some  details.  The  opening  lines  of  the  proposition  are  paired  remarkably 
with  the  closing  lines: 

Ludimus  effigiem  belli  simulataque  veris 
Proelia,  buxo  acies  fictas,  et  ludicra  regna.  .  .  . 

Omnia  quae  puero  quondam  mihi  ferre  solebant 
Seriades,  patrii  canerem  dum  ad  flumina  Serii.  (657  f.) 

That  this  is  not  coincident2il  is  demonstrated  by  another  pairing,  the  invoca- 


430  THE  SCACCHIA  LUDUS  OF  VIDA 

tion  of  the  Seriad  nymphs  with  the  reference  to  their  famous  sister  Scacchis 
(5-13)  and  the  story  of  Scacchis  told  in  the  lines  preceding  the  last  two  (644-56). 
The  echoes  are  many  and  clear  in  these  passages,  and  the  difference  from  the 
corresponding  passages  in  the  earlier  versions  is  marked.  There  is  also  a  par- 
allel (albeit  somewhat  less  important)  between  the  setting  for  the  game  — the 
marriage  of  Oceanus  and  Tellus  at  Memnon's  court  — and  the  reward  to  Mer- 
cury at  the  end.  Comparison  of  the  four  versions  indicates  extensive  changes 
which  were  partly  aimed  at  this  parallelism. 

The  theatrical  setting  is  emphasized  by  the  extensive  structural  revisions. 
The  mock  battle  is  waged  as  if  on  a  stage  or  perhaps  on  a  war-games  field; 
the  frivolous  gods  are  observers  and  in  a  lesser  way  judges;  the  reader  is  au- 
dience both  to  the  game  itself  and  to  the  immediate  audience  for  the  game. 
Critics  who  point  to  the  "verisimilitude"  of  the  battle  scenes,  the  heroes,  and 
the  carnage,  miss  the  omnipresence  of  this  theatrical  setting,  the  qualifying 
and  shaping  effect  of  the  large  metaphor  which  Vida  contrived.  The  multiple 
frame  of  the  poem  gives  the  context;  the  game  recedes  as  we  contemplate  that 
frame  — from  the  boy  hearing  the  tale  on  the  banks  of  his  native  Serius,  to  the 
mythological  tale  of  reward  for  maidenhead  lost,  to  the  setting  of  the  marriage, 
to  the  gods  about  the  table,  and  Mercury  and  Apollo  at  the  chessboard.  It  be- 
gins to  resemble  a  Chinese  box,  which  is  perhaps  what  it  was  meant  to  be. 

The  game  becomes  the  supreme  fiction,  which  is  itself  appropriate  defini- 
tion for  mock-heroic. 

To  what  extent  the  poem  intends  social  or  political  criticism,  I  do  not  know. 
Perhaps  Vida  intended  political  allegory,  aimed  at  the  chaotic  intrigues  abound- 
ing in  the  world  of  Julius  II  and  Leo  X,  or  expressing  heavy  despair  at  the 
disintegrated  but  blustering  condition  of  his  country.  Perhaps  one  reason  for 
his  complete  excision  of  contemporary  references  was  Vida's  recognition  that 
mock-heroic  poetry  worked  best  when  not  tied  to  immediate  or  passing  oc- 
casions. Sometimes,  he  was  stirred  to  passionate  outburst  — as  in  the  ode  to 
Leo  X  calling  for  the  crusade  against  the  Turks  and  in  the  tragic  postscript 
to  Ars  poetica  II  berating  the  suicidal  disunity  of  Italy  ("Ipsi  nos  inter  saevos 
distringimus  enses,"  565).  More  covertly  in  this  poem,  he  may  be  examining 
the  bloody  political  history  of  his  times.  ^^ 

In  the  Ars  poetica,  Vida  argues  that  the  creation  of  artful,  balanced,  lucid 
structures  is  central  to  the  poetic  task.  As  Ralph  Williams  puts  it,  "Meaning— 
and  the  clear  and  effective  presentation  of  meaning— are  of  the  first  impor- 
tance to  a  poem;  the  basic  means  of  achieving  this  lucidity  is  the  significant 
artful  deployment  of  one's  material. "^^  Vida  excoriates  digressions  and  loosely 
organized  works,  and  sees  structure  as  crucial  to  the  achievement  of  meaning 
in  poetry. 

Altera  nempe  arti  tantum  est  obnoxia  cura, 
Unde  solent  laudem  in  primis  optare  poetae. 


MARIO  A.    DI  CESARE 


431 


Tuque  ideo  nisi  mente  prius,  nisi  pectore  toto 
Crebra  agites  quodcumque  canis,  tecumque  premendo 
Totum  opus  aedifices,  iterumque,  iterumque  retractes, 
Laudatum  alterius  frustra  mirabere  carmen. 
Nee  te  fors  inopina  regat,  casusque  labantem. 
Omnia  consiliis  provisa,  animoque  volenti 
Certus  age,  ac  semper  nutu  rationis  eant  res.^'' 

Vida  fulfills  well,  I  think,  Sir  Philip  Sidney's  injunction  to  the  poet  to  "take 
.  .  .  the  course  of  his  own  invention. "^^ 

Harpur  College 
State  University  of  New  York  at  Binghamton 


Notes 


1 .  Marci  Hieronymi  Vidae  Cremonensis  De  arte  poetica  lib.  Ill  .  .  .  Eiusdem  De  ludo  scac- 
chorum  lib.  I.  .  .  .  Rome,  1527.  This  was  the  last  book  published  by  Lodovico  degli  Ar- 
righi  da  Vicenza,  better  known  as  Vicentino,  in  May,  1527;  he  disappeared  in  the  Sack 
of  Rome.  For  a  brief  biography  of  Vida,  see  my  Vida's  Christiad  and  Vergilian  Epic  (New 
York:  Columbia  Univ.  Press,  1964),  pp.  1-39  and  nn.  For  description  of  this  edition, 
as  of  all  editions  and  translations  cited  in  this  paper,  see  my  Bibliotheca  Vidiana:  A  Bib- 
liography of  Marco  Girolamo  Vida,  Biblioteca  Bibliografica  Italica,  39  (Florence:  Sansoni, 
1974).  The  poem  is  sometimes  cailled  Scacchorum  liber  (also  spelled  Scachorum,  just  as  Scacchia 
is  on  occasion  spelled  Scachia  [pace  R.T.  Bruere,  Classical  Philology,  51]);  the  preferred 
title,  used  by  Vida  himself  in  the  1550  Cremona  edition  of  his  Poemata  and  thereafter, 
is  Scacchia  Indus.  This  essay  draws  on  the  introduction  to  my  edition.  The  Game  of  Chess: 
M.  G.  Vida's  Scacchia  Indus.  With  English  verse  translation  and  the  texts  of  the  three  earliest  ver- 
sions. Bibliotheca  Reformatorica  &  Humanistica,  13  (Nieuwkoop,  Holland:  Antiqua- 
riat  DeGraaf,  1975).  All  citations  to  the  text  are  to  this  edition. 

2.  De  rei publicae  dignitate  in  Poemata  omnia  quae  ipse  vivens  agnoverat,  ed.  G.  and  C.  Volpi. 
Volume  2  (Padua:  Cominus,  1731),  part  2,  p.  47. 

3.  See  Bibliotheca  Vidiana,  entries  195,  202,  206. 

4.  Jan  Kochanowski,  Szdchy  (Cracow:  Wirzbiety,  n.d.  [1555?]),  a  quarto  volume 
consisting  of  12  leaves.  This  greatly  amplified  translation-adaptation  has  been  published 
or  reprinted  many  times  since  the  latter  16th  century. 

5.  Nos.  227,  52,  240,  275,  267,  284. 

6.  Scaliger,  Hypercriticus ,  cited  by  F,  Oudin,  Poemata  didascalica,  2nd  ed.  (Paris:  De- 
lalain,  1813),  1:503;  Francesco  Flamini,  II  Cinquecento  {MWan:  Vallardi,  1903),  p.  113; 
Giuseppe  Toffanin,  //  Cinquecento,  4th  ed.  (Milan:  Vsdlardi,  1945),  p.  47. 

7.  Biblioteca  Comunale  di  Belluno,  MS  371  V.B,  Entitled  Hieronymi  Vidae  de  ludo 
scachorum  ad  Rm.  Federicum  Fregosum  Archiepm.  Salemitanum,  this  fragment  of  302  hex- 
ameters is  part  of  an  anthology,  Carmina  auctorum  multorum  .  .  .  apresb.  Costantino  Egregio 
juniori  olim  possessa.  .  .  .  According  to  Professor  Cecilia  Pagani  of  Belluno,  the  poems 


432  THE  SCACCHIA  LUDUS  OF  VIDA 

were  collected  by  Francesco  Pelligrini  in  1886.  The  Vida  fragment,  in  a  sixteenth- 
century  hand,  is  on  pp.  38-45.  Fregoso  was  elected  Archbishop  of  Salerno  in  1507. 

8.  Madrid,  Biblioteca  Nacional,  17565,  from  the  collection  of  Pascual  de  Gayangos: 
Marci  Hieronymi  Vidae  de  Ludo  scachorum  Liber  Ad  Federicum  Fregusium  Archiep.  Salern.  Ap- 
parently autograph,  the  MS  consists  of  22  folios  and  is  bound  with  the  Pulcher  visas  of 
Scipio  Balbo,  Finalensis,  "Impressum  Bononiae  per  lo.  Baptistam  Phaelem.  MDXXIX." 

9.  British  Library,  Harleian  6518:  Marci  Hieronymi  Vidae  Scacchorum  Liber.  24  vellum 
folios,  unnumbered,  with  18  lines  to  a  page.  The  Wolfenbiittel  text  (printed  in  1525 
or  1526)  was  prepared  by  Erasmus's  associate,  Hilarius  Bertulphus.  It  begins  "Ad  Lec- 
torem.  Lector  candide,  libellum  hunc  .  .  .  nunc  primum  in  lucem  damus";  there  is  no 
indication  of  editor,  publisher,  place  of  publication,  or  date.  The  title  is  found  on  Aiiii: 
Marci  Hieronymi  Vidae  Scachorum  liber.  The  Paris  edition  (1529)  had  the  same  title,  Marci 
Hieronymi  Vidae  Scachorum  liber;  15  numbered  leaves  in  italic  letter. 

10.  Nowhere  else  in  Vida's  work  do  we  have  such  extensive  examples  of  his  detailed 
revisions  and  his  efforts  at  developing  both  a  style  and  a  structure  all  his  own.  There 
are  variant  versions  of  the  Ars  poetica  in  a  19th-century  copy  of  what  was  probably  a 
1520  manuscript,  and  oi De  bombyce  in  another  British  Library  manuscript,  but  neither 
of  these  provides  as  much  range  in  variation  as  does  this  "lusus  .  .  .  de  re  ludicra."  I 
have  explored  some  aspects  of  the  four  versions  in  my  edition  (see  n.  2),  but  much  more 
could  be  done.  [In  that  edition,  incidentally,  the  base  text  which  I  used  for  the  third 
version  is  the  Paris  1529  edition  rather  than,  as  I  stated  there,  the  Harleian  MS.  I  am 
not  quite  sure  how  this  confusion  occurred, but  I  am  grateful  to  Gregory  Giesekam, 
who  noticed  what  appeared  to  be  impossible  misreadings  of  the  Harleian  and  thus  alerted 
me  to  my  error.] 

11.  Ralph  K.  Hagedorn,  Benjamin  Franklin  and  Chess  in  Early  America  (Philadelphia, 
1958),  pp.  16  f.  Franklin's  comments  are  expanded  and  embellished  by  Vincenzo  Cic- 
chitelli:  Sulle  opere poetiche  di M.G.  Vida  (Napoh:  L.  Pierro,  1904),  pp.  174  f.,  192  f.  For 
another  enthusiastic  discussion  of  morals  as  fostered  by  Vida's  chess,  see  the  introduc- 
tion by  J.  B.  Levee  to  his  edition  and  translation  of  several  of  Vida's  poems,  Les  Vers 
a  Soie  .  .  .,  (Paris:  Nicolle,  1809),  pp.  vi-viii. 

12.  Harold  C.  Schonberg,  Grandmasters  of  Chess  (Philadelphia,  1973),  pp.  22  f.,  and 
see  also  pp.  27,  30,  124,  131  f.,  137. 

13.  H.  J.  R.  Murray,  A  History  of  Chess  (Oxford,  1913),  p.  791. 

14.  II  poema  epico  e  mitologico  (Milan:  Vallardi,  1912),  pp.  354f. 

15.  After  1510  and  at  about  the  time  he  was  composing  the  first  full  version  of  the 
Scacchia,  Vida  wrote  a  forceful  allegorical  poem  sharply  attacking  enemies  of  the  dead 
Pope  Julius  II  — Carmen  pastorale,  in  quo  deploratur  morsjulii  H  [n.p.,  n.d.,  but  probably 
Rome  1513];  the  work  was  never  included  in  collected  editions.  In  the  dedicatory  letter 
to  the  deceased  Pope's  brother.  Cardinal  Leonardo  della  Rovere,  Vida  wrote:  "Leges 
hie  quidem  nonnulla  simpliciter  (ut  a  Graecis  sit)  dicta,  quaedem  vero,  immo  fere  omnia 
figurate,  hoc  est,  per  allegoriam."  Letter  and  poem  are  2ilso  available  in  Tommaso  Agosto 
Vairani,  Cremonensium  Monumenta  Romae  Extantia  (Rome:  Salmonius,  1778),  part  2,  pp. 
46-60. 

16.  Ralph  Williams,  The  De  arte  poetica  of  Marco  Girolamo  Vida  (New  York:  Columbia 
Univ.  Press,  1976),  pp.  148-49. 

17.  De  arte  poetica  2.15-16,  156-62. 

18.  An  Apologie for  Poetrie  in  Elizabethan  Critical  Essays,  ed.  G.  G.  Smith  (Oxford  Univ. 
Press,  1904),  1:158-59. 


Zusammenfassung  der  Referate 
und  Einleitung  zur  Diskussion 


Herr  Effe  hat  in  seinem  Beitrag  deutlich  gemacht,  dafi  die  mythologisch- 
narrativen  Abschnitte  im  antiken  Lehrgedicht  als  explizite  Digressionen  in  den 
Text  eingeschoben  sind  und  von  daher,  je  nach  der  Haltung  des  Autors  sei- 
nem Stoff  gegeniiber,  in  verschiedener  Weise  funktionalisiert  werden.  Ge- 
meinsam  scheint  jedoch  alien  ein  gewisses  kompensatorisches  Potential  zu  sein, 
das  aus  dem  Konflikt  zwischen  der  aristotelischen  Mimesisforderung  und  der 
nichtmimetischen  Gattungsgeschichte  des  Lehrgedichts  entstand.  Im  Zusam- 
menhang  mit  dem  neulateinischen  Lehrgedicht,  dessen  Autoren  die  antiken 
Gattungsvorbilder  selbstverstandlich  durch  und  durch  kennen  und  standig 
zitieren,  ergabe  sich  daher  die  Frage,  ob  Effes  Typologie  auch  auf  die  neu- 
lateinischen Gattungsvertreter  anwendbar  ist  und  ob  die  Digressions- 
komponente  nicht  durch  eine  mehr  integrative  Sehweise  abgeschwacht  wurde. 
Zu  fragen  ware  vielleicht  auch,  ob  die  produktionsorientierte  Kategorisierung 
von  Effes  Typologie  durch  eine  rezeptionsorientierte  zu  erganzen  ist,  d.  h. 
inwieweit  die  neulateinischen  Gattungsvertreter  bei  ihrer  Wahl  der  fiktional- 
narrativen  Themen  sich  durch  die  entsprechenden  Haltungen  der  antiken  Lehr- 
dichter  haben  bestimmen  lassen  und  inwieweit  die  historischen  Leser  der  neu- 
lateinischen Lehrgedichte  solche  verschiedenen  Funktionsmomente  erkannt  und 
die  Lehrattitiide  dann  jeweils  dementsprechend  decodiert  haben. 

Aus  dem  Referat  von  Herrn  Akkerman  haben  wir  gesehen  — und  das  ware 
bereits  eine  erste  Antwort  auf  die  soeben  formulierten  Fragen  — ,  dafi  nach  Mei- 
nung  der  Theoretiker  vom  14.  bis  16.  Jalirhundert  das  Lehrgedicht  nicht  Fach- 
liches  lehren  will,  dafi  es  nicht  Fertigkeiten  und  Verfahren  als  nachvollziehbare 
und  wiederholbare  Handlungen  vorstellen  will,  sondern  Dinge,  Sachverhalte 
und  Tatigkeiten  aus  der  realen  Lebenswelt  in  einer  asthetischen  Perspektive 
beschreiben  und  vorfiihren  will.  Es  sieht  demnach  so  aus,  2ils  ob  die  soge- 
nannten  neulateinischen  L^Argedichte  keine  LMrgedichte  im  Sinne  handlungs- 
anweisender  Texte  sind,  sondern  vielmehr  der  poetische  Versuch,  den  Sach- 


434  ^^S  NEULATEINISCHE  LEHRGEDICHT 

informationen  unter  Weglassung  der  praktischen  Dimension  und  deren  Ex- 
plizierung  einen  asthetischen  und  damit  literaturfahigen  Status  zu  verleihen. 
Das  vermag  offensichtlich  zum  einen  zu  erklaren,  warum  das  Lehrgedicht 
keinen  besonderen  Platz  im  poetologischen  System  erhielt  und  sich  die  von 
Herrn  Akkerman  vorgefuhrten  Poetiken  dariiber  ausschweigen,  zum  andern 
darauf  hindeuten,  dafi  das  aristotelische  Mimesis-Kriterium,  soweit  es  durch 
die  Rezeption  der  aristotelischen  Poetik  iiberhaupt  bekannt  war,  in  seinem 
normativen  Status  Veranderungen  erfahren  konnte: 

a)  zunachst  dahingehend,  dafi  der  Bereich  der  mimesis /imitatio  entschieden 
weiter  gefafit  wurde  als  es  die  aristotelische  Defmition  zuliefi:  Herr  Akkerman 
wies  darauf  hin,  dafi  Fracastoro  dem  Dichter  eine  Imitation  der  transzendenten 
Idee  eines  Stoffes  zuerkennt,  womit  wir  wieder  bei  Herrn  Effes  Kriterien  des 
Transzendenten  waren; 

b)  dann  aber  in  die  Richtung  einer  zunehmenden  Ausweitung  des  Hand- 
lungsaspekts  (im  aristotelischen  Sinn)  innerhalb  des  Lehrgedichts,  d.  h.  in  dem 
Versuch,  Lehre  und  Beschreibung  in  Handlung  und  Erzahlung  umzusetzen. 
Wenn  ein  solchermafien  strukturiertes  Lehrgedicht  die  Lehre,  d.  h.  die  asthe- 
tisch  vermittelte  Sachinformation  in  verschiedene  Handlungssequenzen  inte- 
grierte,  die  ihrerseits  wieder  narrativ  vermittelt  werden  konnten,  war  die 
Erzahlung  als  literarische  Darbietungsform  auch  fur  diese  Art  von  Poesie 
gewahrleistet.  Es  bedurfte  somit  auch  von  daher  keiner  besonderen  Behand- 
lung  des  Lehrgedichts  als  einer  vom  herkommlichen  erzahlenden  Epos  prin- 
zipiell  verschiedenen  Textsorte  oder  Gattung. 

Herr  Roellenbleck  hat  in  seinem  Referat  und  an  mehreren  Stellen  seines 
Buches  iiber  Das  epische  Lehrgedicht  Italiens  im  ftinfzehnten  und  sechzehnten  Jahr- 
hundert  (yiuncht-n,  1975)  darauf  hingewiesen,  dafi  z.  B.  Fracastoro  "seinen  Be- 
richt  als  epische  Erzahlung  habe  gestalten  woUen  und  das  Prasens  des  Traktats 
vermieden  habe  zugunsten  eines  Tempus,  das  es  ihm  erlaubte,  den  Ablauf  als 
spannende  Handlung  zu  prasentieren"  (1.  c.  147,  A.  86).  Konnen  wir  die  Kon- 
sequenz  der  Versuche,  das  strikte  aristotelische  Mimesiskonzept  zu  unterlaufen 
und  auch  die  Lehrdichtung  fiir  die  Poesie  zu  retten,  darin  erblicken,  dafi  iiber 
den  Umweg  der  Umsetzung  von  Lehre  und  Beschreibung  in  Handlung  und 
Erzahlung  eine  zunehmende  partielle  Fiktionalisierung  des  Lehrgedichts  er- 
reicht  wird,  wie  sie  stellenweise  z.  B.  in  den  ersten  zwei  Biichern  der  Syphilis, 
in  abgerundet-geschlossener  Form  im  dritten  Buch  der  Syphilis  und  in  Vidas 
Scacchia  Ludus  vorliegt?  Herr  Di  Cesare  hat  in  seinem  Referat  die  Verdran- 
gung  des  Didaktischen  durch  das  Fiktionale  in  Vidas  Schachgedicht  deutlich  her- 
ausgearbeitet. 

Eine  solche  Konsequenz  und  Sicht  der  Dinge,  wie  sie  die  Beitrage  der  Re- 
ferenten  nahelegen,  wiirde  aber  bedeuten,  dafi  der  von  Herrn  Effe  fiir  die 
antiken  Lehrgedichte  aufgezeigte  Digressionscharakter  der  mythologischen  und 
historischen  erzahlenden  Partien,  der  als  Basis  fiir  seine  Typologie  des  an- 
tiken Lehrgedichts  fungiert,  gerade  seine  Funktion  als  Digression,  als  Abwei- 


HEINZ  HOFMANN  435 

chung  und  Exkurs,  verloren  hat.  Es  ist  nun  nicht  mehr  ein  Abweichen  vom 
und  wieder  Zuriickkehren  zum  Pfad  von  Lehre  und  Beschreibung,  sondern 
eine  narrative  Fundierung  und  Einbettung  der  Beschreibung,  die  wir  zuneh- 
mend  in  den  neulateinischen  Lehrgedichten  antreffen.  Dies  scheint  mir  ein  we- 
senthches  Ergebnis  der  vier  Referate  zu  sein,  und  hier  konnten  weitere 
Untersuchungen  iiber  die  bei  alien  Ubereinstimmungen  doch  auch  divergie- 
renden  Vertextungsstrategien  antiker  und  neulateinischer  Lehrdichtungen 
anschliefien. 


Zusammenfassung  der  Diskussion 

Die  folgende  Diskussion,  die  nicht  chronologisch  nachgezeichnet,  sondern 
in  ihren  Hauptpunkten  skizziert  werden  soil,  thematisierte  Probleme  der  an- 
tiken  Lehrdichtung  selbst  als  auch  des  Fortwirkens  der  antiken  Tradition  in 
der  Renaissance. 

Das  antike  Lehrgedicht  betreffend,  wurden  Fragen  der  Fiktionalisierbar- 
keit  des  Stoffes  selbst  diskutiert  und  die  —  durchaus  vorhandenen  —  Beziehungen 
zwischen  Typen  von  Lehrdichtung  (im  Sinne  der  Effeschen  Typologie)  und 
den  jeweils  behandelten  Stoffen,  von  denen  manche  sich  mehr  fur  eine  be- 
stimmte  typologische  Behandlungsweise  eigneten  und  damit  auch  grofiere 
Moglichkeiten  fur  fiktionale,  d.  h.  narrativ-mythologische  Digressionen  boten 
(Berger/Effe).  Dabei  waren  die  Unterschiede  zwischen  Beschreiben  im  Sinne 
des  wissensvermittelnden  Lehrvortrags  und  Erzahlen  als  Form  der  narrativen 
Digression  bereits  mit  dem  aristotelischen  Mimesiskonzept  gegeben,  das,  wie 
es  von  W.  Rosier  ("Die  Entdeckung  der  Fiktionalitat  in  der  Antike,"  in:  Poe- 
tica  12,  1980,  283-319)  interpretiert  wurde,  die  dichterische  Fiktion  als  Akt 
spezifischer  Wahrheitsstiftung  poetologisch  aufwertet  und  damit  den  Fiktio- 
nalitatscharakter  von  (erzahlender)  Poesie  gegen  den  nichtfiktionalen,  deskrip- 
tiven  Charakter  z.  B.  der  Lehrdichtung  absetzt,  die  als  nichtmimetisch,  d.  h. 
als  nichtfiktional  von  Aristoteles  aus  dem  Bereich  der  durch  Fiktionalitat  de- 
fmierten  Poesie  ausgegrenzt  wurde  (Lausberg/Effe). 

Das  Fortwirken  der  antiken  Tradition  betreffend,  wurde  festgestellt,  dafi 
weder  die  platonische  Kritik  am  Dichter  und  damit  auch  nicht  das  platonische 
Mimesiskonzept  bei  Fracastoro  weitergewirkt  hat,  sondern  dafi  Fracastoro  die 
Mimesis  ausschliefilich  im  aristotelischen  Sinn  ganz  positiv  gewiirdigt  habe 
und  sich  auch  in  den  anderen  der  herangezogenen  Schriften  keine  Spur  der 
platonischen  Mimesislehre  habe  fmden  lassen  (Berger/Akkerman).  Ebenso- 
wenig  ist  in  der  neulateinischen  Lehrdichtung  und  poetischen  Theorie  eine 
Nachwirkung  der  Diskussion  bei  Macrobius  Saturnalia  5,  15  f.  feststellbar,  wo 
Eustathius  im  Rahmen  der  Diskussion  iiber  die  Kataloge  bei  Homer  und  Ver- 
gil zwischen  "describere"  und  "narrare"  unterscheidet  bzw.  von  "digressio"  und 
"enumeratio"  spricht  und  den  narrativen  Digressionen  innerhalb  der  deskriptiv- 


436  DAS  NEULATEINISCHE  LEHRGEDICHT 

aufzahlenden  Kataloge  ein  wirkungsasthetisches  Potential  zuspricht:  "Uterque 
in  catalogo  suo  post  difficilium  rerum  vel  nominum  narrationem  infert  fabulam 
cum  versibus  amoenioribus,  ut  lectoris  animus  recreetur"  (5,  16,  1).  Doch  weder 
diese  Erorterung  noch  die  unmittelbar  anschliefiende  Ausweitung  derselben 
Beobachtung  auf  die  Georgica  (5,  16,  5)  wurden  in  der  Renaissance  in  diesem 
Zusammenhang  rezipiert  (Lausberg/Roellenbleck/Akkerman). 

Ein  letzter  Punkt  gait  schliefilich  der  Imitationspraxis  hinsichtlich  einzelner 
antiker  Texte  oder  Textgruppen  in  der  neulateinischen  Lehrdichtung.  Aus- 
zuschliefien  ist  dabei  von  vornherein  eine  traditionsstiftende  Wirkung  der 
spatantiken  Bibeldichtung,  die  durchaus  als  gegliickter  Fall  von  christlicher 
Lehrdichtung  angesehen  werden  kann,  auf  die  neulateinische  Lehrdichtung, 
da  das  Bibelepos  als  nicht  zum  antiken  genus  didascalicum  gehorend  angesehen 
wurde  und  folglich,  weil  nur  die  in  der  Antike  als  Lehrdichtung  betrachteten 
Texte  in  der  Renaissance  als  Modell  dienten,  nicht  im  Kontext  der  neulatei- 
nischen Lehrdichtung  gepflegt  wurde:  Vidas  Christias  stellt  sich  daher  auch  nicht 
in  die  Tradition  des  didaktischen,  sondern  des  christianisierten  mythologisch- 
heroischen  Epos,  d.  h.  in  die  Tradition  der  Aeneis  und  nicht  der  Georgica 
(Radle/Di  Cesare/Ludwig). 

Mehr  jedoch  als  die  theoretischen  Aufierungen  der  Antike  und  der  Renais- 
sance steht  das  jeweilige  einzelne  Werk  der  Antike  im  Vordergrund,  das  als 
Vorbild  fur  einen  neulateinischen  Lehrdichter  diente.  Hier  mufi  man  aller- 
dings,  was  den  Einflufi  von  Lukrez  betrifft,  beachten,  dafi  er  unter  Leo  X. 
(1513-1521)  verboten  wurde,  dafi  seine  Lektiire  sich  aber  spater,  wie  das  Lehr- 
gedicht  des  Antonius  Palearius  zeigt,  wieder  durchsetzen  konnte  (IJsewijn). 
Im  Bereich  der  konkreten  Einzelwerke  wurden  z.  B.  weder  Ovids  Fasti  noch 
seine  Ars  amatoria  in  den  Poetiken  als  Lehrgedichte  gewiirdigt  oder  iiberhaupt 
als  solche  erwahnt;  dennoch  aber  dichteten  der  Italiener  Novidius  Fraccus  und 
der  Deutsche  Nathan  Chytraeus  im  16.  Jahrhundert  Lehrgedichte  iiber  das 
Kirchenjahr,  die  dem  Vorbild  der  ovidischen  Fasti  folgten.  Ebenso  sind  von 
den  Fasti,  teilweise  auch  von  den  als  didaktisches  Epos  rezipierten  Metamor- 
phosen,  Abraham  Cowleys  Plantarum  libri  sex  beeinflufit,  die  zudem  in  mancher 
Hinsicht  auch  ein  Gedicht  sui  generis  sind.  Schliefilich  darf  man  alle  die  vielen 
kleineren  neulateinischen  Gedichte  nicht  vergessen,  wie  z.  B.  William  Lilys 
Carmen  de  moribus,  ein  Mahngedicht  in  elegischen  Distichen,  das  von  fast  alien 
englischen  Schulkindern  in  der  Renaissance  gelesen  wurde,  oder  die  teilweise 
in  Gedichtform  abgefafiten  lateinischen  Grammatiken  von  Joannes  Despau- 
terius  von  Ninove  (ca.  1460-1520)  und  dem  eben  genannten  William  Lily. 
Wenngleich  daher  die  hexametrischen  Lehrgedichte  im  hohen  und  kunstvol- 
len  Stil  als  die  Meisterwerke  ihrer  Gattung  das  Bild  des  neulateinischen  Lehr- 
gedichts  bestimmt  haben  mogen,  ist  mit  dieser  Form  des  hehrepos  der  gesamte 
Bereich  des  neulateinischen  Lehrgedichts  noch  keineswegs  erfafit  (IJsewijn/ 
Dillon/ Akkerman/Roellenbleck) . 


4 

RHETORIC 

AND     LINGUISTICS 

(Including  Philology  and  Epistolography) 


La  bataille  des  "latiniseurs" 

et  des  "helleniseurs"  au  XVIP  siecle 

a  propos  du  P.  Philippe  Labbe 

et  du  Jardin  des  Racines  Grecques 

Jean-Claude  Margolin 

En  me  transportant  aujourd'hui^  dans  la  France  de  Louis  XIV  et  en 
faisant  porter  ma  reflexion  sur  deux  ouvrages,  le  c6\hhrG  Jardin  des 
racines  grecques  des  hellenistes  de  Port-Royal,  au  premier  rang  des- 
quels  il  faut  ranger  Claude  Lancelot  et  Isaac  le  Maistre,  et  les  Etymologies  des 
mots  frangais^  du  non  moins  celebre  Pere  Jesuite  Philippe  Labbe,'^  je  ne  ferai 
pas  apparaitre  un  conflit  de  nationalites,  puisque  les  protagonistes  sont  fran- 
gais  et  qu'ils  vivent  dans  un  Etat  profondement  centralise.  De  plus,  c'est  la 
langue  frangaise  qui  fait  I'objet  de  leurs  quetes  respectives.  Or  ce  sont  precise- 
ment  les  mots  frangais,  ou  plutot  leur  origine  ou  leur  etymologie,  qui  seront 
au  coeur  d'un  debat  que  j'appelle  aujourd'hui  la  bataille  des  "latiniseurs"  con- 
tre  les  "helleniseurs." 

Debat  qui  n'est  pas  ne  au  XVIP  siecle  parmi  les  erudits,  meme  s'il  a  pris 
a  cette  epoque,  pour  des  raisons  que  nous  aurons  a  degager,  un  caractere 
specifique.  Je  rappellerai  simplement  quelques  titres  d'ouvrages  du  XVP 
siecle  qui  temoignent  d'une  volonte  d' "hellenisation"  de  la  langue  frangaise 
par  concurrence  avec  le  latin.  Qu'il  nous  suffise  d'evoquer  les  noms  de  Jean 
Picard  qui  poussait  I'audace,  dans  son  De  prisca  Celtopoedia,^  jusqu'a  preten- 
dre  que  les  Grecs  avaient  du  aux  anciens  Gaulois  leur  civilisation  et  leur  langue, 
d'Henri  Estienne  et  de  son  celebre  Traicte  de  la  conformite  du  langage  frangois 
avec  le  grec,^  celui  du  benedictin  tourangeau  Joachim  Perion,  auteur  du  De 
linguae  Gallicae  origine  ejusque  cum  Graeca  cognatione,  ou  encore  celui  — moins 
connu  — de  Blasset,  auteur  picard  d'un  dictionnaire  alphabetique  des  mots 
grecs,  accompagnes  de  leur  traduction  en  frangais  et  en  latin. ^  Mais  nous  de- 
vons  bien  reconnaitre  que  certaines  etymologies  nous  paraissent  relever  de 
la  plus  haute  fantaisie,  ce  qui  ne  laisse  pas  de  nous  surprendre  quand  elles  sont 
signees  de  I'auteur  du  Thesaurus  Graecae  linguae.  Rappelons  par  ailleurs  que  le 
meme  Henri  Estienne  avait  soutenu,  onze  ans  apres  la  Conformite  et  seule- 
ment  quatre  ans  apres  le  Thesaurus,  un  traite  de  "la  conformite  du  frangais 
avec  le  latin"  ou  plutot  De  Latinitate  falso  suspecta,^  dans  lequel  il  prouvait  que 
le  frangais  et  le  latin  etaient  au  fond  la  meme  langue. 


43^  '  BATAILLE  DES  "lATINISEURS"  ET  "hELLENISEURS" 

CommenQons  done  par  ouvrir  I'ouvrage  du  R.  P.  Philippe  Labbe,  puis- 
qu'aussi  bien  e'est  lui  qui  attaque  le  premier.  L'epitre  de  Philippe  Labbe,  "pres- 
tre  de  la  Compagnie  de  Jesus"  a  "Messieurs  de  rAcademie  Frangoise"  est  datee 
du  21  mai  1661,  soit  quatre  ans  apres  la  publication  dujardin  des  racines  grec- 
ques  dont  il  a  fait  sa  cible.  Lancelot,  ou  le  porte-parole  des  "helleniseurs"  de 
Port-Royal,  ne  mettra  que  trois  ans  pour  repondre  aux  attaques  de  Labbe, 
dans  la  preface  de  la  seconde  edition  des  Racines  datees  de  1664.^^  Mais  ces 
dates  ne  sont  pas  seulement  des  jalons  dans  une  histoire  qui  ne  serait  marquee 
que  par  des  polemiques  d'ordre  litteraire  ou  scientifique:  comment  ne  pas  evo- 
quer  en  quelques  mots  le  tableau  des  evenements  politiques  et  religieux  de 
ces  deux  decennies?  En  1643,  trois  ans  apres  la  parution,  en  edition  posthume, 
de  VAugustinus  de  Saint-Cyran,  et  apres  la  premiere  dispersion  des  "Solitaires" 
de  Port  Royal,  ordonnee  par  Richelieu,  quatre  d'entre  eux  se  sont  regroupes 
aux  "Granges,"  dont  Antoine  Arnauld,  theologien  et  docteur  en  Sorbonne.  En 
1646,  ils  seront  douze. 

De  1648  a  1653,  c'est  la  Fronde.  Et  c'est  au  lendemain  du  siege  de  Paris 
que  les  ennemis  de  Port-Royal  decident  d'engager  une  action  qui  leur  parait 
decisive:  le  ^^  septembre  1649,  la  Sorbonne  condamne  sept  propositions  ou 
se  trouve  resumee  la  doctrine  de  VAugustinus.  L'annee  suivante  (1650),  85 
eveques  adressent  au  pape  Innocent  X  une  lettre  collective  dans  laquelle  ils 
lui  demandent  de  condamner  cinq  des  sept  propositions  anterieurement  con- 
damnees  par  la  Sorbonne:  c'est  chose  faite  par  la  buUe  du  31  mai  1653.  Une 
nouvelle  buUe  d'octobre  1656  confirme  cette  condamnation  en  affirmant  que 
les  dites  propositions  sont  bien  dans  VAugustinus,  ce  que  niait  Arnauld.  L'As- 
semblee  du  clerge  exigera  l'annee  suivante  de  tous  ses  membres  qu'ils  fassent 
entiere  soumission  en  signant  un  formulaire.  Entre-temps,  a  I'invitation  d'Ar- 
nauld,  qui  venait  d'etre  condamne  par  la  Sorbonne,  Pascal,  qui  avait  renonce 
au  monde  et  qui  partageait  toutes  les  conceptions  jansenistes,  publiait  —  entre 
le  23  Janvier  1656  et  le  24  mars  1657  —  ses  Provinciales.  Dans  le  camp  des  Jesuites, 
les  attaques  contre  1'  "heresie"  janseniste  faisaient  rage,  et  le  P.  Philippe  Labbe 
lui-meme  avait  public  des  1651  Le  Triomphe  de  la  verite  catholique  contre  les  no- 
vateurs,  ou  la  condamnation  dejansenius  par  les  conciles,  les  papes,  les  eveques,  les  Uni- 
versites,  les  docteurs  et  les  ordres  religieux}^  Quant  a  cette  annee  1657,  qui  voyait 
apparaitre  dans  le  formulaire  une  machine  de  guerre  anti-janseniste,  et  ou 
Lancelot  et  Le  Maistre  publiaient  leur  Jardin  des  racines  grecques,  elle  etait  aussi 
celle  ou  la  repression  politico-religieuse  devait  supprimer  les  Petites  Ecoles, 
c'est-a-dire  precisement  ces  etablissements  pour  lesquels  ce  manuel  etait  fait. 
On  sait  que,  contrairement  a  la  methode  des  Jesuites  qui  mettaient  le  latin 
a  la  premiere  place,  les  Jansenistes  recommandaient  I'emploi  du  frangais, 
sans  pour  autant  detroner  le  latin  au  profit  du  grec.  Si  les  choses  avaient 
quelque  peu  traine  entre  1657  et  1661,  en  fevrier  de  cette  meme  annee,  le 
texte  du  formulaire  fut  dument  etabli,  et  Antoine  Arnauld,  les  theologiens 
de  Port-Royal  et  les  religieuses  seront  contraints  de  se  soumettre.  Or  1661  est 


JEAN-CLAUDE  MARGOLIN  439 

precisement  I'annee  ou  paraissent  les  Etymologies  du  P.  Labbe  avec  sa  preface 
a  rAcademie.  On  salt  que  Taugustinisme  avait  fini  par  creer  au  sein  de  I'E- 
glise  et  meme  de  la  societe  frangaise  un  foyer  d'opposition,  dont  Louis  XIV 
ne  pourra  venir  a  bout  — tout  au  moins  physiquement  —  que  par  ses  dragons, 
I'expulsion  des  religieuses  et  la  destruction  de  Port-Royal-des-Champs  au  debut 
du  XVIir  siecle.^^ 

Reprenons  le  livre  du  P.  Labbe.  Le  ton  de  la  polemique  est  donne  des  la 
page  de  titre  puisque  ses  Etymologies  de  plusieurs  mots  francois  sont  presentees 
d'entree  de  jeu  "contre  les  abus  de  la  Secte  des  Hellenistes  de  Port-Jloyal." 
Les  protagonistes  sont  nettement  designes:  d'une  part,  nous  avons  affaire  a 
un  Jesuite  linguiste  — ou  qui  se  veut  tel  — et  qui,  tout  en  fournissant  ces  etymo- 
logies (selon  le  titre  de  I'ouvrage),  reste  solidaire  de  tous  les  membres  de  sa 
Compagnie,  ainsi  que  de  I'Academie  Frangaise  (dont  il  ne  fait  d'ailleurs  pas 
partie),  et  d'autre  part  aux  "nouveaux  Hellenistes  ou  Greciseurs"  (comme  il 
les  nomme)  qui  ne  peuvent  designer  qu'Isaac  Le  Maistre  et  Claude  Lance- 
lot, ^'^  meme  s'il  ne  les  appelle  jamais  par  leur  nom.  II  nous  suffira  de  repro- 
duire  quelques  lignes  de  I'Epitre  a  "Messieurs  de  I'Academie  Frangoise"  ou 
de  I'Avertissement  aux  lecteurs,  pour  degager  I'esprit  de  cette  vaste  entreprise, 
que  nous  ne  voulons  pas  encore  qualifier  de  linguistique  ou  d'ideologique. 

Apres  avoir  rendu  hommage  aux  Academiciens  frangais,  dont  les  juge- 
ments  sont  sans  appel  en  matiere  de  Ian  gage,  le  P.  Labbe  commence  par  ins- 
truire  son  proces  "contre  des  personnes  qui  jusques  a  cette  heure  ont  este 
estimees  pleines  d'esprit  et  fort  intelligentes  en  nostre  langue."^^  L'affaire  est 
d'importance,  poursuit  le  Jesuite  frangais,  car,  selon  lui,  il  s'agit  "du  renverse- 
ment  general  et  de  la  ruine  presque  totale  du  Ian  gage,"  ce  precieux  heritage 
regu  "de  nos  ancetres  depuis  douze  ou  treize  siecles."^^  II  rappelle  cette  verite 
"constante  entre  les  personnages  sages,"  a  savoir  que  le  latin  etait  autrefois 
la  langue  commune  "dans  toutes  ces  contrees,  apres  qu'elle  eust  succede  a 
I'ancienne  Gauloise,  partie  sur  I'AUemande,  ou  Thioise,  naturelle  a  nos  pre- 
miers Frangois  glorieux  conquerans  des  Gaules."^  II  denonce  encore  la 
pretention  de  "ravir  aux  Romains  et  aux  peuples  de  la  Germanie  la  quailite 
de  Peres  et  d'Autheurs  de  nos  paroles  vulgaires"^^  et  ceux  qui  "se  donnent 
beaucoup  de  peine  de  passer  la  mer  pour  aller  chercher  des  etymologies  jusque 
dans  les  provinces  les  plus  eloignees  de  la  Grece,  et  ne  voyent  pas  qu'ils  se 
mettent  en  evident  danger  de  faire  un  triste  naufrage  en  un  si  long  et  si  peni- 
ble  voyage. "^^  Le  Pere  Jesuite  use  de  metaphores  extremement  energiques. 
La  secte  qu'il  denonce  est  decrite  avec  plus  de  precision  dans  le  long  Aver- 
tissement  aux  Lecteurs,  qui  constitue  un  veritable  manifeste.  En  fait  Icjardin 
des  racines  grecques  avait  eu  un  precedent  sous  la  forme  d'un  ouvrage  public 
en  1645  par  un  gentilhomme  champenois  du  nom  de  Jules  Cesar  de  Ber- 
nieres,^^  sieur  de  la  Motte  Renuez,  qui  soutenait  la  meme  these,  a  savoir 
I'affmite  directe  de  nombreux  mots  frangais  avec  le  grec,  mais  Labbe  n'avait 


440  '  BATAILLE  DES     LATINISEURS     ET     HELLENISEURS 

pas  juge  digne  de  lui  de  le  refuter.  D'autre  part,  on  se  souvient  de  I'accusation 
de  plagiat  lancee  centre  les  auteurs  de  Port-Royal,  dont  le  travail  ne  serait 
qu'un  tissu  d'ignorances,  d'erreurs,  ou  de  conjectures  que  Ton  fait  passer  pour 
autant  de  certitudes.  Autrement  dit,  c'est  au  nom  de  la  veritable  connaissance 
du  grec  que  le  P.  Labbe  refute  ces  "nouveaux  hellenistes"  comme  etant  des 
ignorants.  II  n'est  d'ailleurs  nullement  gene,  a  I'occasion,  de  s'exprimer  en 
termes  assez  peu  reverencieux  a  I'egard  de  certains  "anciens,"  tels  que  Guil- 
laume  Bude  ou  Lazare  Baif  qui  "mirent  en  vogue  les  pantoufles,  les  hoque- 
tons,  les  chauferettes,  les  verbes  couper,  mocquer,  trouver,  entamer,  et  autres 
semblables."  II  n'ose  pas  dire  trop  de  mal  d'auteurs  aussi  celebres  que  Henri 
Estienne,  Guillaume  Postel,  Vatable,  Jacques  Toussain,  Pierre  de  la  Ramee, 
Isaac  Casaubon  ou  Claude  Saumaise,  mais  il  se  "rattrape"  par  la  suite:  il  faut 
reconnaitre  qu'il  a  le  plus  sou  vent  raison,  au  regard  de  la  science  etymolo- 
gique  moderne.^^  Mais  il  est  surtout  heureux  de  rendre  hommage  a  I'hu- 
maniste  franco- italien,  champion  du  ciceronianisme  et  de  la  romanite,  Jules 
de  I'Escale  (autrement  dit  Scaliger)  et  a  I'Allemand  Gaspard  Barthius  qui,  nous 
dit-il,  "se  sont  declarez  ouvertement  contre  ces  nouveautez  etymologiques." 
II  indique  un  troisieme  personnage,  qui  n'est  autre  que  "ce  brave  Espagnol 
Louys  Vives." 

Ce  que  le  Pere  Jesuite  reproche  aux  hellenistes  de  Port-Royal,  c'est  leur 
dessein  pedagogique,  leur  volonte  de  faire  passer  a  leurs  eleves  ce  qu'il  es- 
time  etre  des  "absurditez  et  ignorances  insupportables,"  sans  compter  leur 
methode  de  versification  des  racines  grecques.  Mais  comment  ne  pas  suspecter 
les  motivations  extra- scientifiques  qui  animent  notre  etymologiste  romanisant 
ou  latinisant  quand  il  se  range  respectueusement  derriere  le  "Tres-Chretien 
Monarque"  Louis  XIV  dans  sa  volonte  de  poursuivre  cette  "secte,"  de  "defen- 
dre  et  empecher  toutes  leurs  assemblees  illicites,"  et  qu'il  denonce  sans  am- 
bages "les  maximes  dangereuses  du  Jansenisme  .  .  . ,  I'une  des  plus  damnables 
heresies  qui  ayt  jamais  attaque  I'Eglise."^*  On  reconnait  la  le  ton  inquisito- 
riail  ou  les  formules  de  procureur  du  Triomphe  de  la  Verite  Catholique  de  1651. 
II  avoue  d'ailleurs  clairement  qu'il  s'est  decide  a  publier  son  recueil  d'ety- 
mologies  pour  faire  piece  aux  Jansenistes. 

Dans  ces  conditions  il  ne  nous  sera  pas  possible  d'ignorer  ses  engagements 
ideologiques,  en  un  temps  de  persecution  des  Jansenistes  et  d'influence  gran- 
dissante  des  Jesuites.  Nul  n'ignore  qu'a  notre  epoque  I'etude  de  la  langue 
et  de  la  culture  latines  sert  souvent  d'argument,  dans  des  discussions  d'ordre 
ideologique  ou  politique,  meme  si  elles  recouvrent  parfois  des  discussions  d'or- 
dre pedagogique.  Comment  ne  pas  comprendre  que,  pour  les  hellenistes  de 
Port-Royal,  les  maitres  de  Pascal  et  de  Racine,  la  langue  et  la  litterature  grec- 
ques constituaient  aussi  une  arme  defensive  contre  la  latinite  envahissante  —  y 
compris  dans  une  partie  de  la  litterature  relevant  d'auteurs  frangais  — ,  dont 
I'Eglise  du  Gesu,  le  College  Romain  et  la  rhetorique  "borromeenne"  sym- 
bolisent  quelques  aspects. 


JEAN-CLAUDE   MARGOLIN  4^1 

Quand  on  aborde  Les  Etymologies  des  mots  frangois,  et  qu'on  a  lu  au  prealable 
I'Epitre  a  1' Academic  Frangaisc  ct  rAvertissemcnt  aux  Lccteurs,  on  sc  rend 
compte  sans  peine  que  Ton  joue  avec  le  feu. 

Examinons  maintenant  a  I'aide  de  quelques  exemples,  fournis  a  la  fois  par 
les  auteurs  dujardin  et  par  les  commentaires  du  P.  Labbe,  la  nature  du  debat, 
ou  du  moins  du  debat  explicite. 

Voici  par  exemple  trois  longues  pages  consacrees  au  mot  cher.  Ainsi  s'ex- 
prime  Labbe,  prenant  toujours  soin  de  faire  suivre  le  mot  frangais  du  mot 
latin  dont  il  derive  (meme  quand  le  latin  provient  lui-meme  du  grec): 

Cher,  cams,  cherte,  caritas  annonae,  cherir  quelqu'un,  carum  habere,  en- 
cherir,  denrees  encheries,  faire  du  renchery,  etc.  Voyez  ci-dessus  ca- 
resse.  Nos  Hellenistes  ecrivent  charus  et  le  tirent  de  X^?^^  salve,  R.  x«tpa), 
je  me  rejouis.  De  la  vient  X(x.^ol,  joye,  rejouissance,  feste,  celebrite,  d'oij 
vient  nostre  mot  de  chere,  lequel  se  prenait  anciennement  pour  le  vi- 
sage, le  bon  visage  estant  le  meilleur  temoignage  de  la  joye.  J'adjoute- 
ray  icy  I'observation  que  j'en  ay  faite  il  y  a  plus  de  quinze  ans,  dans  mon 
Etymology  que  frangois  non  encore  imprime:  chere,  air  du  visage  gay, 
joyeux,  gracieux,  amiable,  est  derive  par  quelques-uns  du  mot  grec  xapa, 
qui  signifie  la  teste. 

La  suite  de  I'article  prouve  qu'il  n'est  pas  entierement  oppose  a  cette  ety- 
mologic, mais  il  revient  a  sa  propre  opinion,  admettant  d'ailleurs  qu'en  ce  do- 
maine  il  n'y  a  pas  de  verite  objective  qui  fasse  la  loi:  "Pour  moy,  ecrit-il,^^ 
j'ayme  mieux  dire  que  chere  estant  la  disposition  de  celuy  qui  desire  temoigner 
son  affection  a  I'amy  qu'il  cherit,  qu'il  tient  cher,  et  en  ses  bonnes  graces,  ce 
mot  vient  de  carus.  Et  une  grande  preuve  de  cette  verite  est  qu'en  parlant  sim- 
plement,  nous  disons  faire  chere  a  quelqu'un,  qui  vaut  autant  que  faire  bonne 
chere.  .  .  ."2« 

Mais  il  y  a  mieux  (ou  pire,  si  Ton  pre  fere),  car  la  formule  "nos  hellenistes" 
qu'il  repete  sans  se  lasser  a  longueur  de  dictionnaire  n'est  somme  toute  qu'un 
peu  familiere  ou  ironique.  Par  exemple  (pp.  138-39)  il  s'interesse  au  mot 
chiche,^^  qu'il  rattache  a  chic^^  (du  latin  cicum),  "chose  de  neant,  festu,"  comme 
chez  le  Comique,  cicum  vel  ciccum  non  interduim,  je  n'en  baillerois  pas  un  zest. 
Mais  il  fait  venir  ce  cicum  de  cicer,  le  pois  chiche,^^  rendu  si  celebre  par  Ci- 
ceron,  sans  marquer  I'hesitation  manifestee  jadis  par  Bovelles  en  presence 
de  ce  probleme  etymologique,  Bovelles  qu'il  cite  tres  sou  vent  et  dont  il  dit 
ici  que  "les  paroles  ne  sont  pas  a  mepriser."^^  II  s'explique  en  rapprochant 
les  deux  mots  chiche  (celui  qui  tient  fort  a  son  bien,  qui  est  epargnant)  et  pois 
chiche.  Bovelles  nous  apprenait,  a  la  grande  joie  de  ceux  qui  aiment  les  ety- 
mologies "logiques,"  meme  si  I'histoire  ou  la  philologie  n'y  trouvent  pas  leur 
compte,  que  "les  hommes  parcimonieux  vivent  de  legumes  pour  epargner  leur 
bourse. ^^  Mais  qu'en  pensaient  "nos  hellenistes"?  A  la  verite  c'est  sur  le  mot 


442  •  BATAILLE  DES  "lATINISEURS"  ET  "hELL^NISEURS" 

chicane  ou  le  mot  chicaneur^^  qu'il  les  reprend,  mais  ces  mots  selon  lui  sont 
derives  de  chiche  (le  chicaneur  etant  celui  "qui  vetille  sur  rien"): 

Je  ne  saurois  approuver,  ecrit-il,  les  hellenistes  de  ce  temps  qui  font  venir 
chicaneur  de  Bixa^eiv,  quaestionem  agere,  ou  par  une  meprise  singuliere 
melee  d'une  grande  ignorance,  de  xixaveiv  chez  Homere,  qu'ils  tour- 
nent  offendere,  mais  dans  une  signification  toute  opposee  a  celle  des  chi- 
caneurs  et  querelleux:  xixavco,  xix^w  et  xixrifxi  ne  signifiant  autre  chose 
que  invenio,  occupo,  corripio.  .  .  }^ 

La  consultation  des  lexicographes  et  etymologistes  modernes  nous  incite  a 
plus  de  tolerance  envers  certaines  hypotheses  que  Ton  pourrait  juger  incon- 
grues  a  premiere  vue.  Mais  je  veux  laisser  encore  la  parole  au  coriace  Labbe: 
"Cette  be  vue  gentille  me  remet  en  memoire  une  autre  qui  montre  leur  grand 
sgavoir  tant  en  latin  qu'en  grec"^^  (un  pas  de  plus  est  franchi  dans  I'escalade 
verbale,  puisque  "nos"  hellenistes  sont  taxes  d'incompetence  en  grec!),  et  il 
les  engage  a  relire  Nicandre  a  cause  du  mot  oXoxoi  qu'ils  ont  compris  comme 
des  queues  de  pommes,  de  cerises,  de  grenades  ou  d'autres  fruits,  alors  qu'il 
s'agit  de  "petites  bestes  comme  des  poux  qui  s'engendrent  sur  les  fruits," 

Malgre  une  divergence  de  vues  sur  I'etymologie  du  mot  aigre'^  (pp.  18-19), 
qu'il  rapproche  de  acerbus,  acidus,  mais  aussi  d'alacer  (comme  alaigre),  il  n'ecrase 
pas  sous  ses  sarcasmes  les  "hellenistes"  qui  font  venir  aigre  du  grec  aYpiO(;  "qui 
se  dit  d'un  homme  agreste  ou  sauvage,  ou  des  fruits  sauvages  et  aigres  au 
goust."^^ 

On  remarquera  qu'il  laisse  generalement  en  paix,  ou  traite  avec  beaucoup 
plus  de  courtoisie  les  Estienne,  les  Perion,  les  Bude,  les  Turnebe:  il  est  vrai 
que  ces  grands  esprits  ont  cesse  depuis  longtemps  de  s'interesser  a  ces  joutes 
intellectuelles!  Voici  par  exemple  la  fameuse  pantoujle,^^  qui  continue  a  faire 
sourire  les  hellenistes  contemporains  .  .  .  et  les  autres:  Pantoufle,  ecrit-il  (p. 
372),  chaussure  de  chambre  qui  a  du  liege  pour  semele,  et  tient  le  pied  chaud, 
a  donne  de  I'exercice  a  nos  Greciseurs:  les  uns  la  tirent  avec  Bude  de  Tuav- 
T69eXXo(;,  qui  est  toute  de  liege,  et  cela  est  faux;  les  autres  de  7uaT69eXXo(;,  qui 
foule  le  liege,  et  celle-la  est  veritable  quant  au  sens;  les  autres,  avec  Gra- 
paldus'^^  cite  par  Du  Bois'^^  de  7ravT69tXo(;  oiy  de  7cavT6(peXo(;,  qui  est  tres  utile 
et  tres  commode,  particulierement  aux  gens  d'estude.  Turnebe  aussy,  quoy 
que  tres-judicieux  en  toute  autre  chose  (on  aura  note  la  difference  de  traite- 
ment  verbal!)  s'est  grandement  abuse  avec  son  etymologic  latine  de  pedum  in- 
fulae. 

Que  cette  derniere  remarque  soit  pour  nous  une  occasion  de  rendre  justice 
au  P.  Labbe:  s'il  place  le  latin  au-dessus  du  grec  et  si  je  me  suis  permis  de 
I'appeler,  par  symetrie  avec  les  "greciseurs"  un  "latiniseur,"  il  ne  se  laisse  pas 
pour  autant  imposer  n'importe  quelle  etymologic,  pourvu  qu'elle  soit  latine! 
Quant  a  la  solution  de  la  pantoufle,  les  etymologistes  et  linguistes  modernes 
lui  donneraient  sans  doute  raison  quand  il  conclut,  avec  une  pointe  de  seep- 


JEAN-CLAUDE  MARGOLIN  443 

ticisme:  "Je  croy  qu'il  y  a  quelque  mystere  nationzd  dans  cette  terminaison, 
comme  en  ecoufle,  maroufle,  caroufle,  etc.,  et  qu'elle  a  passe  le  Rhin  pour 
venir  en  nostre  France,  pantuflen  disent  les  Allemans."'^^ 

En  faisant  venir  le  nom  de  Rome,  Roma  (p.  421),  de  son  fondateur  Romulus, 
et  non  du  grec  pcofxrj,  fortitudo,  robur,  comme  le  voudraient  "quelques  gram- 
mairiens  dans  leur  allusion  puerile,"  le  Pere  Jesuite  concilie  son  amour  du 
latin  et  de  tout  ce  qui  touche  a  I'histoire  romaine.  Quant  au  mot  patron,  c'est 
pour  lui  encore  une  occasion,  non  seulement  d'ironiser  sur  la  tendance  de  ses 
adversaires  a  helleniser  a  outrance,  mais,  comme  on  I'a  deja  vu,  de  leur  don- 
ner  en  toute  assurance  une  legon  de  grammaire  et  de  litterature  grecque: 

Patron  vient  de  patronus,  mot  purement  latin,  que  les  jurisconsultes  et 
autheurs  recens  ont  grecize,  Trdcxpcov  chez  Plutarque,  Theophile,  et  une 
infmite  d'autres  semblables.  ...  Si  ces  bons  Messieurs  avoient  bien  leu 
Hesyche,  ils  auroient  trouve  la  condamnation  de  leur  temerite  et  igno- 
rance grossiere:  Ttaxpwve?  ot  TCpwxoi  xwv  a^icoGevrwv  ttj?  Pcofiaicov  tcoXi- 
xiiaq  UTUO  PcofXuXou  exaxov  bvzt<;  et  ce  qui  suit.  .  .  .^^ 

Sur  ce  point,  on  ne  peut  donner  tort  a  Labbe,  meme  s'il  n'applique  pas  la 
meme  regie  a  ses  adversaires:  si  le  grec  a  emprunte  un  mot  au  latin,  il  est 
juste  de  rapprocher  le  mot  frangais  du  latin  et  non  du  grec! 

Le  benefice  de  I'age  (Labbe  a  54  ans  en  1661,  et  Lancelot  seulement  46; 
quant  a  Isaac  Le  Maistre,  il  en  a  48)  le  conduit  parfois  a  traiter  "ces  Mes- 
sieurs" de  "jeunes  hellenistes."  II  est  vrai  que  I'expression  est  surtout  ironique 
et  blessante,  quand  on  songe  que  Lancelot  avait  deja  ecrit,  au  moment  de 
cette  ridicule  contro verse,  un  traite  de  grammaire  grecque,  un  autre  de  gram- 
maire latine,  et  sa  Grammaire generale  qui  suffiraient  a  lui  assurer  une  renommee 
perdurable,  en  depit  de  quelques  bevues  etymologiques. 

S'il  s'en  remet  assez  souvent  a  I'autorite  d'hommes  qui  ont  passe  leur  vie 
a  des  travaux  de  lexicographic  comme  Menage  ou  Vossius,  tout  en  se  reser- 
vant  le  droit  de  "choisir  ce  qui  lui  semblera  le  plus  probable,"  il  n'hesite  pas 
a  exprimer  des  jugements  varies  a  I'egard  de  ceux  qu'il  n'a  pas  I'intention 
d'agresser,  quoi  qu'ils  aient  pu  ecrire.  C'est  le  cas  de  Bovelles,  qu'il  cite  tres 
souvent,  mais  qu'il  reprend  parfois  de  la  belle  fagon,  mais  sans  la  grossierete 
meprisante  de  Glarean,  voire  de  Hunger i'^^  ainsi,  a  la  page  263,  a  propos 
de  gogues  et  de  goguettes,  qui  interviennent  a  la  suite  d'un  article  sur  gober 
et  ses  derives,  et  que  le  P.  Labbe  fait  deriver  de  gaudium,  "joye"  ou  "goye" 
en  Picard  ("et  de  la  il  te  chantera  goguettes,  il  est  en  ses  gogues,  en  ses  bonnes 
et  joyeuses  humeurs,  un  goguelu,  goguelureau,  goguenard,  etc.,"*  il  ajoute, 
faisant  allusion  a  I'article  du  De  origine  dictionum  Gallicanarum:  "Boiiille  dit  beau- 
coup  d'impertinences  en  la  page  77."  Ou  encore,  a  propos  de  I'origine  de  la 
cloche^^  (pp.  148-49)  ou  claque  en  picard:  le  mot,  selon  lui,  vient  du  bas-latin 
cloca  (comme  docker,  de  clocarium),  et  non  pas  de  cochlea  (escargot),  comme  le 


444  *  BATAILLE  DES  "lATINISEURS"  ET  "hELL^NISEURS** 

voulait  Bovelles,  en  deux  passages  de  son  livre  (pp.  14-15)  auxquels  il  se  refere 
expressement:  "Voyez  les  sentimens  de  Boiiille,  bien  eloignez  des  nostres,  fai- 
sant  venir  sa  cloque  picarde  de  coclea,  etc."  L'explication  de  Bovelles,  qu'il  ne 
reproduit  pas,  etait  la  suivante:  "" Cloque.  Mot  courant  pour  cloche  (campana). 
Le  mot  est  venu  de  cochlea,  comme  code.  En  effet,  par  un  defaut  de  pronon- 
ciation,  la  lettre  L  a  ete  portee  en  avant  et  placee  dans  la  premiere  syllabe, 
au  lieu  de  la  seconde  ou  elle  devait  se  trouver.  Les  petites  cloches,  que  les 
Latins  appellent  tintinnabula,  et  notre  peuple  cloquettes,  sont  faites,  creuses  et 
rondes,  a  la  fagon  des  tortues  et  des  escargots."  ^ 

Mais  voici  des  remarques  particulierement  severes  et  ironiques  a  I'egard 
des  Messieurs  de  Port-Royal:  Irriter^^  venant  d'ipeOetv  est  "une  imagination 
fantasque  des  Hellenistes"  (p.  302),  ou  item^^  venant  de  exi  (adhuc).  Ce  qui  lui 
fait  ajouter  que  ces  Messieurs,  sectateurs  de  Henri  Estienne,  ont  oublie  de 
faire  venir  jusquiame  de  uoaxuajxo?.  Heure,  hora,  cbpa,^*  est  encore  une  occa- 
sion de  railler  I'eupot?  (qui  va  bien,  qui  coule  bien)  des  grammairiens  modernes, 
qu'il  met  en  parallele  avec  le  oupiO(;  {ventus  secundus  et  prosper),  d'Estienne,  de 
Perion  et  de  plusieurs  autres.^^ 

S'il  denonce  avec  sarcasme  les  abus  ridicules  et  les  etymologies  artificielles 
creees  par  le  prejuge  anti-scientifique  de  la  preeminence  et  de  I'universalite 
de  la  langue  grecque,  il  n'a  certainement  pas  tort.  Mais  ne  se  trompe-t-il  pas 
de  cible?  A-t-il  lu  quelque  part,  dans  les  ouvrages  de  ses  adversaires,  et  no- 
tamment  dans  le  Jardin  des  racines  grecques,  pareille  pretention  a  I'universalite 
du  grec  ou  une  volonte  declaree  de  denoncer  le  magistere  du  latin?  Et  les 
rapprochement  de  mots  ou  de  racines  etaient-ils  vraiment  consideres  par  les 
grammairiens  jansenistes  comme  inspires  par  la  nature  meme  du  langage, 
ou  par  la  nature  meme  des  choses?  lis  s'etaient  pourtant  expliques  dans  leur 
preface  de  1657. 

Arretons-nous  un  moment  au  verbe  rever,  qui  cause  encore  aux  linguistes 
et  lexicologues  modernes  tant  de  soucis  et  les  laisse  fmalement  dans  une  per- 
plexite  extreme^^,  ou  nous  voyons  notre  auteur  plein  de  certitude,  meme  si 
a  la  fin  de  I'article  il  revient  avec  humour  sur  ce  qu'il  a  affirme,  par  une  sorte 
de  pirouette.  C'est  d'abord  pour  lui  I'occasion  de  rejeter  le  rapport  etabli  avec 
le  verbe  grec  pe[xPeiv,  errer,  tournoyer,  vaciller,  tandis  que  revasser  viendrait 
de  pefiPa^eiv,  et  d'affirmer  tout  de  go:  "resver  ou  rever  vient  de  revidere,  avoir 
plusieurs  visions,  fantomes  et  imaginations  redoublees  les  unes  sur  les  au- 
tres."^^  II  donne  toutefois  une  seconde  explication:  le  verbe  frangais  viendrait 
de  deviare,  delirare,  a  via  aberrare  (sans  que  Ton  sache  d'ailleurs  si,  dans  son  esprit, 
delirare  est  un  doublet,  un  synonyme  ou  un  commentaire  explicatif  de  deviare), 
et  il  ajoute:  "on  aurait  dit  dever,^^  puis  rever,  vieux  reveur,  reverie,  revasser 
ou  ravasser,  etc."  Et  voici  la  pointe  finale:  "Que  si  je  reve  en  revant  sur  rever, 
je  croy  qu'en  imitant  le  stile  de  feu  M.  I'Evesque  du  Belley,  mes  reveries  vau- 
dront  bien  celles  des  reveurs  du  Port-Royal."  Rever  pour  rever,  on  pourrait 
le  renvoyer  a  un  passage  celebre  du  Champ-fleury     de  Geoffroy  Tory,  oii  les 


JEAN-CLAUDE  MARGOLIN  445 

rebus  sont  definis  comme  "des  manieres  de  reveries"  et  ou  certains  linguistes 
ont  cru  y  voir  une  origine  etymologique  du  mot  rebus. 

II  se  laisse  lui-meme,  comme  on  voit,  aller  a  quelque  fantaisie,  ce  qui  est 
un  trait  que  nous  ne  saurions  qualifier  de  deplaisant.  Bien  au  contraire.  Mais 
il  veut  opposer  ses  fantaisies  conscientes  a  ce  qu'il  appelle,  a  la  fm  de  son  ar- 
ticle marmaille  "les  grecismes  etudies  de  nos  adversaires,"  c'est-a-dire,  dans 
son  esprit,  des  etymologies  grecques  serieusement  recherchees  et  pesamment 
infligees  aux  lecteurs  dujardin.  Notons  en  passant  qu'il  les  appelle  "nos  ad- 
versaires," alors  qu'il  attaque  le  premier,  ce  qui  montre  bien  qu'il  s'agit  essen- 
tiellement  dans  son  esprit  de  la  "secte"  des  Jansenistes,  opposee  a  la  Societe 
de  Jesus,  auquel  cas  il  a  raison  de  les  appeler  "nos  adversaires,"  car  la  pole- 
mique,  de  part  et  d'autre,  menait  bon  train  depuis  environ  deux  decennies. 

Mais  il  ne  faudrait  pas  croire  que  tous  les  articles  des  Etymologies  du  P.  Labbe 
ne  visent  qu'a  faire  piece  a.u  Jardin  des  racines  grecques:  tres  souvent  aucune  men- 
tion n'est  faite  des  "hellenistes,"  et  les  references  auxquelles  s'accroche  I'ety- 
mologiste  sont  tres  variables:  positives,  quand  il  s'agit  de  Scaliger,  de  Barthius, 
de  Vossius  ou  de  Menage,  tres  circonspectes  et  meme  franchement  nega- 
tives avec  des  "autorites"  comme  Bovelles.  Dans  un  article  sur  le  mot  bis  de 
la  seconde  partie  de  son  ouvrage,  il  se  livre  a  toute  une  serie  d'analyses  de 
mots  comportant  ce  prefixe,  en  se  mefiant  de  ce  qu'on  appelle  les  allusions, 
c'est-  a-dire  des  rapprochements  purement  formels  ou  exterieurs  dont  on  s'ac- 
commode  par  suite  d'un  sens  apparemment  satisfaisant,  mais  qui  ne  sont  en 
fait  que  des  jeux  de  mots,  comme  cercueil,^^  qui  ne  viendrait  pas  de  sarcetiil  ou 
de  sarcophagus  capulus  (venant  lui-meme  de  aapxatpoiyo^,  "qui  mange  la  chair," 
mais  d'un  picardisme  (on  voit  qui  il  vise)  chair-ceiiil,  "qui  cueille  la  chair"  (car- 
nem  colligens).  Ainsi  bis  ne  signifie  pas  noir  sous  pretexte  que  le  pain  bis  est 
du  pain  noir.  Le  pain  bis  serait  done  secundus  sive  secundarius  panis,  un  biscuit 
serait  biscoctus  ou  deux  fois  cuit,  biseau  serait  I'abrege  de  biciseau,  ainsi  de  suite: 
bisque  au  tripot,  bissexte  au  calendrier,  bigorne,  incus  bicornis,  bigarrer  viendrait 
de  bis  variare,  et  beside  de  becyclium  conspicilium,  "lunette  a  deux  ronds  ou  cercles 
qui  ressemblent  deux  petites  lunes,"  etc.^* 

II  aime  a  se  citer,  comme  a  propos  de  I'etymologie  du  nom  de  la  ville  d'Ab- 
beville,  Abbatis  villa^^  (ce  en  quoi  il  n'a  d'ailleurs  pas  tort),  "signifiant  en  sa  pre- 
miere origine  un  village  ou  metairie  dependante  de  I'Abbe  de  S.  Riquier," 
ou  il  renvoie  a  son  "petit  traite"  de  1645,^  traite  dans  lequel  il  s'acharne  con- 
tre  un  certain  Sanson,  qui  lui  avait  demande  humblement  de  le  renseigner 
a  ce  sujet  et  de  bien  vouloir  corriger  ses  bevues,  concernant  la  Bretagne  ab- 
be villoise. 

En  depit  des  aspects  deplaisants  de  sa  personnalite,  de  sa  suffisance  ou  de 
son  pedantisme,^^  les  reproches  que  le  P.  Labbe  adresse  aux  auteurs  dujar- 
din sont  souvent  fondes.  On  s'etonne  meme  que  des  hommes  connaissant  le 
grec  comme  Lancelot  et  Le  Maistre  de  Sacy  2uent  pu  se  laisser  aller  pour 


446 


BATAILLE  DES     LATINISEURS     ET     HELLENISEURS 


Tamour  du  grec,  a  ces  bevues  que  notre  etymologiste  releve  sans  charite, 
meme  si  les  raisons  qu'ils  invoqueront  pour  leur  defense  s'inspirent  d'une  sol- 
licitude  pedagogique  touchante:  certains  rapprochements  de  mots  ou  de  frag- 
ments de  mots  sont  moins  des  etymologies  que  des  allusions^^  et  visent  moins 
a  I'expression  de  la  verite  ou  de  I'essence  du  mot  qu'a  une  tournure  amu- 
sante  dont  les  enfants  se  saisiront  avec  profit. 

De  ce  meme  souci  pedagogique  emane  le  dessein  de  produire  de  petits  en- 
sembles versifies  de  8  a  12  vers  mi-grecs  mi-frangais,  dont  le  responsable  prin- 
cipal fut  Le  Maistre,  et  a  propos  desquels  j'avoue  que  je  me  montrerais  au 
moins  aussi  severe  que  le  P.  Labbe  lui-meme.^^  J'en  donnerai  ici  deux 
echantillons  parmi  les  216  strophes  de  ces  vers  octosyllabiques  dont  les  mots- 
souche  sont  empruntes  soit  au  dictionnaire  alphabetique  des  mots  grecs  soit 
au  dictionnaire  alphabetique  des  mots  frangais  (de  1300  a  1500  mots)  soit- 
disant  tires  de  la  langue  grecque.  Voici  des  vers  formes  a  partir  de  mots  grecs 
commengant  par  kappa: 


1.  Kpio? 

est  le  nom  d'un  belier 

2.  Kpoxri 

trane  et  sable  ou  gravier 

3.  Kpoxo? 

saffran  jaune  denote 

4.  Kpovot; 

Saturne,  ou  qui  radotte 

5.  KpoaT6(; 

bord  ou  frange  on  traduit 

6,  Kp6Ta90(; 

tempe,  et 

7.  KpoTO? 

bruit 

8.  Kpouvoi; 

fontaine  d'eau  saillante 

9.  Kpouco 

louche  et  son  represente 

10.  Kpuo? 

glace  ou  grand  froid,  horreur 

11.    KpUTlTCO 

cache,  et  cela  en  son  coeur. 

Ajoutons  que  le  genre  du  mot,  son  nominatif  et  son  genitif  sont  donnes 
a  la  fin  de  chacun  des  vers,  et  qu'en  bas  de  la  page,  des  notes  philologiques, 
historiques  ou  mythologiques  sont  fournies  en  frangais. 

Voici  maintenant,  avec  la  lettre  [i  (mu)^^  une  autre  serie  de  10  octosyllabes 
(mais  de  11  mots  grecs): 

1.  MuSocv  moisit 

2.  Mu8pO(;  brulant 

3.  MueX6?  pour  la  mouelle  on  prend 

4.  MueTv  choses  saintes  explique 
MuaxT)?  aux  mysteres  s'applique 

5 .  Mufo)  se  plaint,  suce  et  gemit 

6.  MuGo?  fable,  ce  que  I'on  dit 

7.  Mua  la  mouche  a  tout  s'attache 

8.  Muxdco  meugle  en  boeuj  ou  vache 
MuxT)^  Xe  TpOfjLTueGp  champignon 

MuxTTj?         nez,  aime  a  sentir  bon. 


9. 
10 


JEAN-CLAUDE  MARGOLIN  447 

Disons,  pour  etre  juste,  que  les  traductions  proprement  dites  sont  imprimees 
en  italique  et  que  les  mots  surnumeraires  ou  les  chevilles  utilisees  pour  ob- 
tenir,  vaille  que  vaille  un  octosyllabe,  se  contentent  du  romain. 

Ces  racines  rimees  inspirent  plutot  au  Pere  Jesuite  quelques  reflexions 
plus  vengeresses  et  violemment  polemiques  que  simplement  ironiques  ou  amu- 
sees  et  il  prend  meme,  ou  feint  de  prendre  en  pitie  les  jeunes  gens  confies 
aux  soins  des  hellenistes  de  Port-Royal.  Nous  lisons  en  effet  dans  I'Avertisse- 
ment  aux  Lecteurs:  "lis  ont  compose  ce  Recueil  fameux  en  suitte  de  leurs  Ra- 
cines rimees,  et  de  leurs  Methodes  Grecque  et  Latine,  afin  que  les  jeunes  gens 
qu'ils  nourrissoient  (non  seulement  dans  les  trois  maisons  voisines  de  I'abbaye 
du  Port-Roycd  des  Champs,  que  nous  nommerons  quand  il  en  sera  besoin, 
et  en  plusieurs  autres  petites  escholes  borgnes  dans  quelques  villages  et  cha- 
teaux de  la  campagne  aux  environs  de  cette  grande  ville  de  Paris,  mais  encor 
au  loin  dans  des  seminaires  et  colleges  des  villes  et  provinces  plus  eloignees) 
peussent  puiser  comme  dans  une  fontaine  publique  et  ouverte  a  tous  ceux  de 
leur  party,  les  premiers  principes  et  les  origines  les  plus  cachees  de  la  langue 
frangoise,  apprenant  par  coeur  avec  un  grand  soin  les  mots  qu'ils  pretendent 
avoir  este  pris  et  tirez  du  grec  par  nos  ancestres.  .  .  ."^^  La  suite  immediate 
ne  fait  plus  place  a  I'ironie  ou  aux  sarcasmes,  mais  a  la  joie  triomphante  et 
a  Tesprit  de  justice  qu'il  prete  a  Dieu,  qui  a  enfin  mis  un  terme  a  "leurs  per- 
nicieux  desseins"  en  inspirant  au  roi  de  France  les  mesures  que  Ton  sait. 

Mais  pour  en  revenir  aux  vers  rimes  dujardin  des  racines  grecques,  il  faut  sa- 
voir  que  le  grec  n'avait  en  aucune  maniere  un  privilege  dans  son  incorpo- 
ration a  cette  poesie  purement  utilitaire  ou  pedagogique.  Nous  n'avons  qu'a 
ouvrir,  a  n'importe  quelle  page,  la  Nouvelle  methode  pour  apprendre  la  langue  la- 
tine,  pour  retrouver  des  vers  franco-latins  (si  on  peut  les  appeler  des  vers!) 
destines  a  favoriser  la  memorisation  des  regies  de  grammaire  et  de  syntaxe. 
II  n'est  d'ailleurs  pas  certain  que  cette  "naivete"  calculee  n'ait  pas  produit  ses 
effets  sur  de  jeunes  esprits  amuses  par  ce  latin  ou  ce  grec  sans  larmes. 

Voici  deux  echantillons  franco-latins  qui  serviront  de  pendants  aux  echan- 
tillons  franco-grecs  dujardin: 

Regies  XXXIX  et  XXXV  des  declinaisons: 
Les  Accusatifs  sont  ^n  EM 
Comme  Dux  duch  fait  ducem. 
Donne  IM  a  Tussis,  Amussis, 
Sitis,  Securis,  Decussis, 
Joins  Vim,  Pelvim,  Ravim,  Burim 
Ararim,  Tigrim,  Tiberim.^* 

Voici  maintenant  les  deponents  (r6gle  LXX): 
Deponent  bien  se  nommera 
Le  verbe  qui  toujous  aura 


44^  BATAILLE  DES  "lATINISEURS"  ET  "hELLENISEURS* 

Signification  active 


Et  la  conjugaison  passive. 


75 


Pour  mieux  comprendre  les  motivations  nombreuses  et  complexes  qui  ani- 
ment  le  P.  Labbe  contre  les  grammairiens  jansenistes  de  Port-Royal  et  pour 
nous  donner  en  quelque  sorte  deux  autres  pierres  de  touche,  nous  examinerons 
ses  reactions  a  I'egard  de  deux  linguistes  et  compilateurs  etrangers,  qu'il  cite 
frequemment  dans  ses  Etymologies  et  qu'il  utilise  meme  sans  toujours  les  citer: 
Tun  est  le  Hollandais  Georges  Pasor,  I'autre  I'Allemand  Caspar  von  Barth  ou 
Barthius;  le  premier  est  toujours  traite  avec  la  meme  ironie  et  le  meme  dedain 
que  ses  adversaires  frangais,  qu'il  accuse  d'ailleurs  de  s'etre  etroitement  ins- 
pires de  son  oeuvre;  le  second,  avec  respect  et  enthousiasme,  car  il  voit  en 
lui  non  seulement  une  autorite  linguistique  incontestable  —  et  incontestee  — 
mais  surtout  le  philologue  qui,  dans  son  combat  contre  les  abus  des  greciseurs 
de  son  temps  et  des  generations  precedentes,  apporte  de  I'eau  a  son  propre 
moulin/^  Mais  il  ne  s'apergoit  pas  — ou  plutot  il  feint  de  ne  pas 
s'apercevoir  — que  le  combat  philologique  de  Barth  se  double  d'un  combat  ide- 
ologique  ou  plus  exactement  patriotique,  voire  nationaliste,  puisqu'en  faisant 
s'evanouir  dans  son  chapitre  consacre  a  des  mots  frangais  de  pseudo-ety- 
mologies grecques,  celui-ci  entend  surtout  revendiquer  pour  la  langue  alle- 
mande  la  primaute  parmi  les  langues  modernes,  et,  a  defaut  d'une  primaute 
universelle,''  au  moins  I'egalite  avec  la  langue  latine  dans  cette  fonction  con- 
voitee  de  nourrice  des  langues  europeennes.  Ce  n'est  pas  sans  arriere-pensee 
de  la  part  de  Labbe  qu'en  bien  des  articles  ou  il  critique  les  etymologies  de 
Port-Royal,  il  modere  son  enthousiasme  en  vers  son  allie  "objectif,"  car  le  com- 
bat du  jesuite  frzingais  et  gallican  n'est  pas  exactement  celui  du  philologue 
allemand  et  lutherien. 

Le  Hollandais  auquel  Labbe  reserve  ses  sarcasmes  est  done  ce  Georges 
Pasor, ^^  ne  en  1570  a  EUar,  dans  le  pays  de  Nassau,  et  mort  en  1637  a  Fra- 
neker,  auteur  de  nombreux  et  savants  ouvrages  de  commentaires  bibliques, 
et  particulierement  d'index  historico-philologiques  des  noms  propres  — noms 
de  personnes  et  noms  geographiques  du  Nouveau  Testament.  Ajoutons  que 
la  connaissance  de  plusieurs  langues  modernes,  du  latin,  du  grec,  de  I'hebreu 
et  d'autres  langues  proche-orientales,  lui  etait  universellement  reconnue.  Labbe 
lui-meme  reconnait  que  "ce  grammairien  hollandais"  etait  "assez  diligent  et 
exact  en  ce  qui  estoit  son  mestier,  c'est-a-dire  de  grammaire."  Mais,  ce  qui 
gene  notre  Jesuite  frangais,  c'est  "qu'il  a  voulu  ajouter  a  la  fm  de  son  Dic- 
tionnaire  du  nouveau  testament,  un  Catalogue  des  mots  propres,  qui  se  trou- 
vent  dans  les  ecrits  canoniques  des  Apostres  et  des  Disciples  de  nostre  Seigneur; 
et  pousse  de  son  esprit  grammairien  s'est  voulu  aussi  mesler  de  donner  des 
etymologies  grecques  a  la  plupart  de  ces  noms  propres  tirez  souvent  de  The- 
breu,  ou  de  la  langue  latine. "^^  L'ouvrage  auquel  il  fait  allusion  ne  comporte 
pas  d'ailleurs  d'allusions  au  grec  dans  son  titre  latin:  "Etyma  nominum  propri- 


JEAN -CLAUDE  MARGOLIN  449 

orum,  itemque  analysis  Hebraeorum,  Syriacorum  et  Latinorum  vocabulorum,  quae  in  Novo 
Testamento  uspiam  occurrunt."^^  Mais  il  se  sert  bien  evidemment  d'une  version 
grecque  du  Nouveau  Testament,  ce  a  quoi  ne  veut  pas  songer  Labbe.  Tou- 
jours  est-il  que,  selon  son  detracteur,  "il  s'est  abuse  si  honteusement  qu'il  faut 
que  Messieurs  nos  Hellenistes  ayent  este  bien  aveuglez,  ou  prevenus  puis- 
samment  de  la  capacite  de  cet  estranger  (on  notera  cette  petite  pointe  xeno- 
phobe,  qui  n'est  d'ailleurs  utilisee  qu'a  bon  escient,  mais  qui  correspond  a 
I'une  des  idees  maitresses  de  Labbe:  pourquoi  chercher  ailleurs  ce  que  Ton 
a  en  abondance  autour  de  nous,  la  nation  frangaise  s'elargissant  au  besoin 
a  la  latinite),  pour  souscrire  si  facilement  a  ses  sentimens  et  commettre  apres 
luy  des  fautes  si  remarquables."^^  Quelle  est  done  la  nature  de  ses  fautes?  Pour 
I'examiner,  nous  nous  contenterons  de  nous  reporter  dans  I'ouvrage  de  Pasor 
aux  mots,  ou  plutot  aux  noms  que  Labbe  a  choisis  a  titre  d'exemples  de  ses 
"honteuses  erreurs,"  et  qui  font  d'ailleurs  I'objet  d'articles  respectifs  dans  ses 
Etymologies  des  mots  Jrangais,  autant  d'occasions  de  se  moquer  du  grammairien 
hoUandais:  Dmsille,  Lois,  Philadelphie,  Rhege,  Salamine,  Tite.  Tout  d'abord,  quand 
Pasor  ecrit  en  grec  ApouaiXXa,  Acoti;,  <I)iXd8eX9eta  priyiov,  SaXajxt?,  Tizoc;, 
et  tous  les  autres,  il  est  faux  de  pretendre  qu'il  ignore  que  certains  de  ces  noms 
peuvent  avoir  une  origine  hebraique. 

Mais  comment  ne  partirait-il  pas  du  grec  dans  ses  notices  redigees  en  latin, 
puisque  c'est  en  grec  qu'il  a  trouve  ces  noms  d2ins  la  Version  des  Septante? 
Pour  ce  qui  est  de  Drusille-Drusilla,^^  cette  "uxor  Felicis  praesidis  Judaeae"  que 
Ton  rencontre  dans  les  Actes  des  Apotres  (24.25),  on  peut  se  demander  si  son 
etymologic  est  bien,  comme  le  pretend  Pasor,  8p6ao^-ov,  la  rosee,  et  iXXo?- 
ou,  oeil  (mot  rarissime,  que  ne  donne  pas  le  Dictionnaire  moderne  de  Liddell- 
Scott,^^  mais  que  Ton  peut  rattacher  a  iXXcoai^-ew?,  distorsion,  ou  defaut  des 
yeux,  ou  a  I'adjectif  iXXco8iri(;,  qui  a  le  meme  sens,  ou  au  verbe  iXXatvco.  Mais 
iXXo*;  est  d'ailleurs  donne  dans  le  Lexique  d'Hesychius).  Ce  n'est  pas  une  mal- 
formation de  I'oeil  ou  un  defaut  de  la  vue  que  designerait  le  nom  de  Drusilla, 
mais  — ainsi  nous  I'explique  Pasor  — des  yeux  baignes  de  larmes  ou  de  rosee: 
"Unde  est  iXXw,  ecrit  Pasor,  oculis  conniveo,  q.d.  cujus  oculus  lachrymatur,  sen  rore 
conspersa"  "C'est  une  haute  beveue,  se  recrie  Labbe,  de  tirer  ce  nom  du  grec, 
comme  qui  dirait  celle  dont  les  yeux  pleurent  et  sont  humides."®*  Et  comme 
argument  majeur,  il  indique  que  d'autres  femmes  que  I'epouse  de  Felix,  gou- 
verneur  de  Syrie,  se  sont  appelees  Drusa,  ou  Drusilla:  ces  dames  etaient  ro- 
maines,  "elles  n'ont  point  ete  chercher  ce  nom  en  Grece,  mais  I'ont  emprunte 
de  Drusus  et  par  diminution  Drusillus"  .  .  . ,  mais  il  ne  nous  donne  aucune  ety- 
mologic de  ce  nom!  II  reste  fidele  a  son  argument,  qui  est  une  veritable  peti- 
tion de  principe,  a  savoir  que,  plus  proches  de  nous  (Frangais)  les  mots  latins 
correspondant  a  des  personnages  ou  a  des  objets,  sont  nos  veritables  "parents," 
meme  s'ils  peuvent  eux-memes  revendiquer  des  ancetres  etrangers. 

La  suite  de  Tarticle  merite  d'etre  citee,  car  elle  est  revelatrice  du  type  par- 


450  BATAILLE  DES  "lATINISEURS"  ET  "hELL^NISEURS" 

ticulier  d'humour  dont  fait  preuve  ce  Jesuite  de  54  ans:  "Apres  une  si  docte 
et  admirable  observation,  il  faut  crier  euye,  UTcipeuye,  TrayxdcXci)?."^^  Lorsque 
Pasor  consacre  un  court  article  (p.  172)  a  Philadelphie,  qu'il  ecrit  bien  en  grec 
OiXa8£X9«a,  avec  la  graphic  courante  i  de  la  diphtongue  ei,  il  ecrit  en  propre: 
"civitas  Decapolis  juxta  Plinium  lib. 5, c.  18,  ad  cujus  Ecclesiam  Johannes  Evan- 
gelista  scripsit,"  et  il  donne  deux  references  a  Y Apocalypse:  1,11,  et  3,7.  Et  il 
rappelle,  ce  a  quoi  nul  ne  saurait  contredire:  "vox  composita  ex  9tXo<;-ou  am- 
icus, et  <x8£X96(;-ou /m/^r,  q.d.  amor  fraternus.  Et  il  cite  encore  le  terme  91X- 
d8eX90(;,  qu'il  rend  en  latin  pa.r fraterna  charitate praeditus,  1,  Petr.  3-8.  Or  Labbe, 
qui  ne  prononce  pas  ici  son  nom,  reprend  "ces  Messieurs"  sur  la  transcription 
grecque  du  nom  de  cette  cite  et  d'autre  part  sur  la  definition  qu'ils  en  don- 
nent.  Les  "hellenistes"  auraient  confondu  C>iXa8£X9eia  et  9iXa8£X9ia,  la  pre- 
miere graphic  seule  indiquant  un  nom  de  ville,  la  seconde  correspondant  a 
I'amitie  fraternelle.  Or  la  faute  —  au  demeurant  fort  benigne  —  n'est  pas  du  tout 
evidente,  d'apres  I'exemplaire  que  j'ai  eu  sous  les  yeux  (Bibliotheque  natio- 
nale,  edit,  de  1657,  Res.  X  2729).  Quant  a  civitas,  qui  peut  designer  une 
cite  ou  la  region  qui  I'entoure,  le  texte  dujardin  ne  justifie  en  aucune  fagon 
cette  legon  peremptoire  du  P.  Labbe:  "Philadelphie  n'est  point  nom  de  pro- 
vince dans  I'Apocalypse,  c'est  une  ville,  comme  Ephese,  Pergame,  Thiatire, 
et  autres,  qui  a  este  nommee  OiXa8£X9£ia  de  son  fondateur,  surnomme  OtX- 
ahtXffoq,  amicus  fratris,  amansfratrem.  .  .  ."^^  En  tout  cas,  Pasor  n'a  pas  confondu 
la  charitas  fraterna  ou  9iXd8eX9ia  et  le  nom  de  la  ville! 

On  ne  donnera  aucun  detail  sur  le  long  article  (5  pages)  consacre  par  Labbe 
a  Salamine,  qui  est  destine  d'une  part  a  se  gausser  de  "nos"  hellenistes,  et 
de  I'autre  a  faire  etalage  d'un  savoir  historico-geographique,  au  demeurant 
fort  impersonnel,  car  n'importe  quel  dictionnaire  fait  la  distinction  entre  la  Sa- 
lamine de  la  mer  Eubee  et  la  Salamine  de  Chypre.  Et  on  ne  s'etendra  pas 
davantage  sur  la  legon  d'etymologie  que  veut  donner  le  Jesuite  a  "Messieurs 
nos  jeunes  Hellenistes."^'^ 

Avec  Barthius  (Caspar  von  Earth,  1587-1658),^^  il  en  va  tout  autrement 
pour  les  raisons  que  nous  avons  dites.  Barth  est  I'un  des  quatre  auteurs  (avec 
Scaliger  "le  pere,"  Louis  Vives  et  meme  Lazare  de  Baif  qui  plaisante  sur 
r  "hellenisme"  des  Frangais  vu  par  les  Allemands  et  par  les  Italiens)  que  Labbe 
cite  en  tete  de  son  livre,  ou  plutot  a  la  fm  de  son  Avertissement  aux  lecteurs. 
II  a  choisi  un  extrait  du  chapitre  4  du  Livre  XIII  de  cet  enorme  in-folio  de 
plus  de  3000  colonnes  (done  plus  de  1500  pages),  compose  de  60  livres,  qu'il 
a  intitule  Adversaries^  et  qui  constitue  une  mine  de  renseignements  et  de 
reflexions  d'ordre  historique  et  philologique,  theologique  et  litteraire,  sur  la 
litterature  latine  de  I'antiquite  et  des  temps  modernes,  sur  la  litterature  sacree, 
et  sur  bien  d'autres  sujets,  comme  celui  que  traite  ce  chapitre,  intitule  par  son 
auteur:  "De  vocabulis  Gallis  non  paucis  perperam  in  EUenismo  quaesitis,  quo- 
rum sedes  in  Germania  est,  Gallicismi  multa  explicantur,  etc."  Ce  chapitre 


JEAN-CLAUDE   MARGOLIN  45I 

(col.  716-18)  est  pour  lui  une  occasion  de  dire  son  fait  a  Jean  Picard,  I'une 
des  "betes  noires"  de  Labbe,  I'auteur  du  De  prisca  Celtopaedia^^  (Paris,  1556), 
et  surtout  de  proclamer  avec  assurance  dans  sa  conclusion  ces  mots,  que  Labbe 
reprend  dans  son  extrait:  "Teutonismum  et  Latinismum  singulas  fere  voces 
et  modos  loquendi  universos  dedisse  hodierno  Gallicismo,"  ajoutant,  pour 
resumer  la  pensee  du  philologue  allemand:^^  "faire  deriver  le  frangais  du 
grec  (les  termes  latins  employes  sont  gallicismus  d'une  part,  et  Graecia  de  I'au- 
tre),  c'est,  a  ce  qu'il  pense,  etre  prive  de  raison  (ratione  carere).'' 


Examinons  done  rapidement  quelques-uns  de  ces  mots  frangais  ou  "galli- 
cismes"  traites  par  Barth  dans  son  in-folio  de  1624,  mots  que  Ton  retrouve 
dans  les  Etymologies  de  Labbe,  que  celui-ci  se  refere  directement  ou  non  aux 
Adversaria. 

Par  exemple  boston,  baculus,  baculum,  est  "degrecise"  par  Barth,  suivi  par 
Labbe, ^^  comme  ne  venant  pas  de  paaxoi;  ou  de  paaxaCca /^ro,  baiulo,  porto, 
comme  le  pretendaient  les  "hellenistes,"  mais  du  germanique:  tout  au  moins 
Labbe  cite  ce  passage  de  Barth,  qui  ecrit:  "Germanicae  linguae  est,  bast  enim 
fustem  flexibilem,  necdum  satis  firma  rectitudine  .  .  .,"^^  se  contentant  d'ecrire 
a  la  suite:  "Pour  moy  j'estime  qu'il  vient  de  battre."  Mais  il  n'est  pas  plus  ex- 
plicite,  faisant  preuve  ici  a  la  fois  de  prudence  et  d'un  certain  esprit  critique 
a  I'egard  du  philologue  allemand  qui  I'aide  pourtant  si  bien  dans  sa  tache. 
Quant  au  mot  batteleur,  qui  appartient  a  la  famille  du  baston,  Barth  ecrit:  "non 
tam  Graecum  PaTToX6yo<;  principem  habet  quam  Germanicum  betteler,  betteler, 
et  ejus  genera  plura,  quibus  solitus  Germanismus  exteras  linguas  locupletare." ]e  sou- 
ligne  cette  nouvelle  allusion,  non  depourvue  de  fierte  patriotique,  a  la  richesse 
et  a  la  generosite  de  la  langue  allemande,  qui  fournit  aux  autres  langues  eu- 
ropeennes  une  grande  partie  des  elements  (ou  des  aliments)  qui  les  font  vivre. 
Nous  avons  evoque  plus  haut  le  nom  du  pangermaniste  Goropius.  Mais  Wolf- 
gang Hunger  le  pensait  deja  et  le  disait  au  milieu  du  XVP  siecle  dans  sa  Vin- 
dicatio  linguae  Germanicae,  ^'^  Schottelius  le  confirmera  dans  la  seconde  partie  du 
XVIF  siecle, ^^  et  dans  ses  considerations  linguistico-etymologiques,  Leib- 
niz lui-meme,^^  que  Ton  ne  saurait  taxer  de  "pangermanisme,"  exprime  des 
reflexions  qui  vont  dans  le  meme  sens.  Quoi  qu'il  en  soit,  la  tentative  de  "degre- 
cisation"  des  mots  frangais  entreprise  par  Barth  dans  ce  chapitre  (et  dans  quel- 
ques  autres  passages  de  son  ouvrage)  est  moins  un  essai  de  latinisation  que 
de  germanisation  de  ces  vocables.  Labbe,  qui  n'a  pas  les  memes  raisons  de 
proclamer  la  superiorite  et  I'anteriorite  de  la  langue  germanique  sur  d'autres 
vernaculaires,  laisse  la  responsabilite  de  bien  des  affirmations  de  Barth  a  son 
auteur,  se  contentant  par  exemple  d'ecrire  a  propos  de  ce  meme  bateleur,  rat- 
tache  par  Perion,  Estienne,  Picard,  a  PaTToX6yo(;  {qui  loquax  est):  "Caspar  Bar- 
thius  aime  mieux  le  deriver  d'un  mot  allemand. "^^  Comme  si  le  probleme  de 
I'etymologie  etait  une  question  de  preference  (subjective  ou  nationale)! 


452  BATAILLE   DES  "lATINISEURS"  ET  "hELLENISEURS" 

Le  verbe  vouloir,  dont  Labbe  se  contente  de  dire^^  qu'il  vient  de  volo,  velle, 
plutot  que  de  [BouXofiai,  PouXeaOai,  comme  volonte  vient  de  voluntas  plutot  que 
de  (BouXTjaK;,  est  plus  rudement  encadre  par  le  philologue  allemand,  qui  declare: 
"Ridiculum  vero  vouloir,  quod  mixtum  e  Germanico  wollen  et  latino  velle  Graeco 
PouXeufia  adscribere"  (p.  717B).  La  guerre,  quant  a  elle,  n'a  pas  besoin  d'ori- 
gine  grecque  {Etymologies,  pp.  274-75,  ci  Adversaria,  col.  718B):  Labbe  cite  les 
Capitulaires  de  Charles  le  Chauve,  tit.  23,  chap.  15:  rixas  et  discessiones,  seu  dis- 
sensiones,  quas  vulgus  vuerras  nominat,  commovere,  et  il  declare,  I'ayant  vraisem- 
blablement  appris  dans  Barthius,  c\^&  guerroyer,  vuerrire,  vient  de  I'allemand.  On 
lit  en  tout  cas  chez  ce  dernier:  ''Guerre,  qui  primis  saltius  labiis  degustarit  Ger- 
maniae  quamcumque  etiam  dialectum,  Graeca  originatione  non  habebit  opus.''  Car 
la  guerre,  dont  il  souligne  le  caractere  defensif,  "populariter  quamvis  defen- 
sioni  aptam  rem  denotat,  sive  manibus  sive  telis,  sive  ingenio  astuve  nego- 
cium  geras.  Unde  guerre  pro  bello  sive  pugna  in  Italorum  Gallorumque  linguas 
descendit."  Pour  en  revenir  a  Labbe,  celui-ci  conteste  I'origine  grecque  yep- 
pov,  "un  ecusson  chez  les  Perses,"  et  il  soupire:  "C'est  renvoyer  bien  loin  nos 
Francois  pour  aller  chercher  une  chose  qui  leur  estoit  si  ordinaire:  ils  devoient 
plutost  aller  en  Italic  et  en  Sicile  au  siege  de  Syracuse  chercher  gerrae,  qui  a 
este  par  apres  rendu  commun  a  Plaute,  Terence,  et  autres  autheurs  latins."^ 

Nous  donnerons  encore  deux  exemples,  celui  de  jardin  et  celui  de  vilain, 
d'apres  Barth  et,  pour  le  second,  d'apres  Labbe  (car  celui-ci  n'a  pas  integre 
jerdin  a  sa  liste  de  mots  frangais).  Les  hellenistes  auxquels  se  heurtait  le  phi- 
lologue allemand,  une  generation  avant  le  Jesuite  frangais,  faisaient  deriver 
(parait-il)  le  mot  jardin  du  verbe  grec  dpBeueiv,  equivalent  du  latin  irrigare, 
"quod  hortum  dicunt,  quia  scilicet  crebro  is  irrigetur"  (done  encore  une  ety- 
mologic par  le  sens,  ou  plutot  par  le  [trop]  bon  sens).  At  cogitandum  erat  vocem 
puram  Germanicam  esse,  qui  /  illud  consonans  loco  R  Graecanici  (nous  voyons 
que  Labbe  n'a  pas  eu  de  peine  a  utiliser  le  terme  pejoratif  d'Hellenistes,  sur 
lequel  il  s'etend  longuement  dans  sa  preface)  solent  pronuntiare  aliter  atque 
Galli,  qui  sibilum  addunt.  Garden  ve\  jardin  nulla  littera  minus  omnibus  Ger- 
maniae  oris  pro  horto  pronunciatur."  Si  Ton  consulte  un  dictionnaire  moderne 
de  la  langue  fran^aise,  comme  le  Grand  Larousse  de  la  Langue,  on  y  trouve 
que  jardin  se  disait  en  ancien  frangais  (vers  le  11712^  siecle)  gard,  et  que  ce 
mot  viendrait  du  francique  gart  ou  gardo.  Dont  acte  pour  Barth,  mais  le  debat 
ne  se  joue  plus  entre  les  latiniseurs  et  les  greciseurs! 

Quant  a  vilain,  il  est  un  bon  exemple  de  la  maniere  de  raisonner  de  nos 
linguistes,  faisant  intervenir  avant  tout  dans  les  considerations  d'etymologie 
des  questions  d'histoire  et  de  semantique  socio-historique  satisfaisantes  pour 
I'esprit.  L' Allemand,  comme  le  Frangais,  condamne  I'etymologie  grecque  pXev- 
vo?,  sordidus,  qualifiee  par  le  second  de  "songe  creux  de  quelques  helle- 
nistes,"^^^  mais,  ajoute-t-il,  "condamnez  par  H.  E.  (entendons  Henri  Estienne) 
et  les  plus  sages  d'entre  eux."  Quant  a  Barth,  il  donne  I'explication  de  son  rejet 


JEAN-CLAUDE  MARGOLIN  453 

de  retymologie  grecque:  '^Blennum  Graecum  Francicum  villein  fecisse  credat  qui 
nescit  in  omnibus  fere  Unguis  rusticum  crassi  cerebri,  segnem,  obtusum,  mi- 
nusque  civilem  sonare,"  et  il  oppose  civilis  a  rusticus,  comme  I'homme  de  la 
ville,  le  civilise,  le  citadin,  le  bourgeois,  a  I'homme  de  la  campagne,  I'inculte, 
le  grossier,  bref  le  vilain!  Et  il  rappelle  que  les  Chretiens  ont  appele  pagani 
ces  hommes  grossiers  des  pagi,  ceux  que  leur  rudesse  de  moeurs  et  d'esprit  n'a- 
vaient  pas  (encore)  fait  acceder  a  I'intelligence  du  Christ.  ^^* 

Demandons-nous  maintenant  comment  les  "hellenistes"  ou  les  "jeunes  helle- 
nistes"  (jouxtant  la  cinquantaine)  ont  reagi  aux  remarques  acides  du  Pere 
Jesuite  soucieux  de  ramener  dans  le  giron  de  la  latinite  ou  dans  "nos  pro- 
vinces" les  mots  frangais  egares  dans  I'Hellade.  II  suffit  pour  cela  d'ouvrir  la 
seconde  edition  dujardin  des  racines  grecques,  publiee,  comme  on  I'a  vu,  chez 
le  meme  imprimeur  parisien,  en  1664,  et  de  lire  la  preface  redigee  par  ces 
Messieurs  de  Port-Royal  (vraisemblablement  par  Lancelot).  D'autres  travaux, 
infiniment  plus  importants,  comme  la  Grammaire  generale  et  raisonnee,  avaient 
entre-temps  mobilise  la  reflexion  de  Lancelot,  compagnon  de  travail  d'Ar- 
nauld  et  de  Nicole. 

Les  auteurs  commencent  par  justifier  le  serieux  de  leur  entreprise  et  sa  des- 
tination premiere.  lis  citent  tout  d'abord  des  "autorites,"  comme  la.  Janua  lin- 
guarum  de  Comenius,^^^  le  Grand  Etymologiste  d'Eustathe,  le  savant 
commentateur  de  Vlliade  et  de  VOdyssee  du  XIP  siecle,  le  Cadmus  Graeco-Phenix 
de  Matthias  Martinius,^^^  philologue  allemand  du  debut  du  XVIF  siecle.  lis 
ont  utilise  Bude,  Postel,  Toussain,  Vatable,  Ramus,  Casaubon,  Saumaise, 
Sursin,  Abstemius,  Vossius,  Pasor,  Perion,  Henri  Estienne,  Trippaut,  et  com- 
bien  d'autres!  Quant  a  la  versification  de  ces  racines  grecques,  jugee  ridicule 
par  "notre  Censeur"  (telle  est  la  maniere  la  plus  courante  dont  est  designe 
le  P.  Labbe),  elle  avait  surtout  une  fonction  pedagogique,  permettant,  grace 
a  I'exercice  de  la  memoire,  facilite  par  les  octosyllabes  rimes,  de  faire  entrer 
dans  le  cerveau  de  jeunes  eleves  de  nombreux  et  difficiles  mots  grecs,  d'ail- 
leurs  expliques  par  des  notes  en  bas  de  page,  et  donnes  dans  leurs  principziles 
determinations  grammaticales.  Pour  ce  qui  est  du  reproche  majeur  d'avoir  con- 
fondu  etymologic  et  allusion,  ils  se  recrient  en  disant  que  leur  adversaire  ne 
les  a  pas  lus  ou  ne  les  a  pas  compris:  la  figure  de  rhetorique  connue  sous  le 
nom  d'allusion  n'avait  pas  d'autre  but  que  de  permettre  des  rapprochements 
amusants  ou  insolites  qui  puissent,  ici  encore,  faciliter  aux  eleves  I'intelligence 
du  mot  grec.  Le  Pere  Labbe  n'est  d'ailleurs  pas  epargne  dans  sa  personne, 
et  la  Preface  dujardin  lui  rend,  si  Ton  me  permet  cette  expression  familiere, 
la  monnaie  de  sa  piece.  C'est  ainsi  que  les  "jeunes"  hellenistes  pensent  qu'  "il 
y  auroit  lieu  de  I'avertir  charitablement  qu'il  est  maintenant  en  un  age  ou  il 
seroit  temps  qu'il  se  defist  de  cette  vanite  de  jeune  Regent,  qui  paroit  encore 
dans  tout  ce  qu'il  fait."^^*  Mais  ils  vont  encore  beaucoup  plus  loin,  I'accusant 
d'etre  un  fieffe  plagiaire,  pillant  sans  vergogne  tous  les  auteurs,  et  a  la  fin 


454  BATAILLE   DES  "lATINISEURS"  ET  "hELLENISEURS" 

de  leur  Avis  aux  lecteurs,  ils  font  allusion  a  une  mechante  histoire  qui  lui  etait 
arrivee  pour  avoir  vole  le  livre  du  Geographe  du  Roy  en  le  faisant  imprimer 
sans  qu'il  y  eut  quelque  chose  de  lui,  "sinon  un  nombre  effroyable  de 
fautes.-^^' 

Abordons  une  question  de  linguistique  que  nous  avons  laissee  volontaire- 
ment  de  cote,  mais  qui  est  reprise  ici,  parce  qu'elle  pose  un  probleme  de  fond 
qui  depasse  de  loin  la  querelle  des  latiniseurs  et  des  greciseurs:  c'est  celle  des 
onomatopees,  autrement  dit  des  mots  forges,  si  Ton  peut  dire,  naturellement, 
par  I'expression  de  la  nature  de  la  voix,  de  la  "nature  des  choses,"  en  quelque 
sorte.  Labbe  y  attachait  beaucoup  d'importance,  comme  on  le  voit  dans  le  "Ca- 
talogue curieux  de  quelques  expressions  des  sons  et  des  voix"  qu'il  a  fait  im- 
primer a  la  fm  de  son  ouvrage,^^^  et  dans  lequel  il  fournit  une  longue  liste 
alphabetique  de  mots  — verbes,  noms,  epithetes  — qui  expriment  des  actions, 
des  fonctions  ou  des  emotions,  dont  la  sonorite  est  manifestee  par  les  phone- 
mes et  les  syllabes  qui  les  constituent.  II  donne  aussi  en  latin  toute  la  serie 
des  verbes  exprimant  les  cris  des  animaux,  invitant  son  lecteur  a  trouver  les 
equivalents  frangais.  Mais  il  exprime  surtout  son  point  de  vue  a  I'occasion 
de  certains  articles,  comme  les  interjections  ah!,  he,  hi,  ho,  hu,  les  verbes  ab- 
boyer,  ahan  et  ahanner,  coaxer,  gober,  les  noms  de  papa  et  de  maman,  le  verbe  beeler, 
forme  sur  le  "cry  naturel  des  brebis  et  moutons  qui  font  bee,  bee,''  ou  encore, 
a  propos  de  I'article  siffler^^^  (I'un  des  plus  virulents  a  I'egEird  des  Hellenistes 
qui  avaient  fait  deriver  le  verbe  frangais  du  grec  aicpXoco,  "et  qui  ne  I'ont  ecrit 
que  pour  estre  siflez  des  sgavans"),  les  onomatopees  st  ("pour  faire  silence"), 
trr  ("pour  chasser  les  oiseaux")  ou  rrr  ("pour  agacer  les  chiens  et  les  mettre  en 
colere").  II  n'est  plus  question  ici  de  grec  et  de  latin,  mais  d'un  probleme  fon- 
damental  concemant  la  nature  et  I'origine  du  langage  et  des  langues,  et  dont 
les  philosophes  et  les  linguistes  du  XVIF  siecle  ont  eu  parfaitement  con- 
science, meme  s'il  leur  manquait  I'appareillage  conceptuel  pour  le  preciser: 
Y  a-t-il  un  langage  naturel?  C'est  le  probleme  du  Cratyle,  c'est  aussi  celui  de 
Descartes  et  de  Malebranche,  surtout  lorsque  la  theorie  des  jugements  dits 
naturels  les  contraindra  a  modifier  quelque  peu  les  rapports  de  la  ratio  et  de 
Voratio. 

C'est  avec  le  mot  ah,  "voix  d'estonnement,  de  douleur  ou  d'admiration"^^^ 
que  se  nouera  par  exemple  le  debat.  En  faisant  venir  ce  mot  tres  particulier 
de  I'interjection  grecque  a  et  s'interessant  tout  specialement  a  ces  petits  mots 
indeclinables  (dont  ils  avaient  etabli  une  longue  liste  dans  une  partie  de  leur 
Jardin),  les  linguistes  de  Port-Royal  mettaient  I'accent  sur  le  fait  culturel  du 
langage:  meme  dans  ses  manifestations  les  plus  elementaires,  comme  I'ex- 
pression d'un  cri  de  douleur  et  d'admiration,  ils  ne  croient  pas  a  la  spontaneite 
toute  naturelle,  toute  animate.  Ce  en  quoi  ils  sont  cartesiens,  mais  aussi  les 
heritiers  de  la  Lingua  d'Erasme:^^^  ce  qui  caracterise  en  effet  le  langage  hu- 
main,  ou  meme  la  voix  humaine,  c'est  son  infmie  expressivite;  meme  une 


JEAN-CLAUDE  MARGOLIN  455 

interjection  peut  individualiser,  alors  que  le  cri  de  I'animal  est  generique.  De 
plus,  en  poussant  un  cri  de  douleur,  I'animal  ne  sait  pas  qu'il  souffre.  A  la  dif- 
ference de  rhomme  qui,  dans  les  multiples  manifestations  de  ses  sensations 
ou  de  ses  emotions  — le  rire  en  est  le  meilleur  exemple  —  s'exprime  comme  il 
a  appris  a  le  faire  par  imitation,  par  acculturation.  A  condition,  bien  entendu, 
qu'il  ne  soit  pas  inconscient!  Le  P.  Labbe  n'a  peut-etre  pas  tort  de  dire  que 
les  Romains  disaient  ah!  comme  les  Grecs,  mais  il  ne  pousse  pas  ses  avantages 
jusqu'a  affirmer  que  le  ah  frangais  provient  du  ah  latin,  et  non  du  ah  grec! 
Mais  pour  lui  le  Ian  gage  peut  etre  un  phenomene  naturel:  pour  les  philo- 
sophes  de  Port-Royal  et  pour  les  cartesiens,  pour  Mersenne  et  pour  Pascal, 
il  ne  peut  etre  que  culturel.  Les  psychologues  et  les  ethnologues  modernes  sa- 
vent  bien  que  ni  le  sourire  ni  les  larmes  ni  meme  les  cris  de  joie  ou  de  douleur, 
ni  sans  doute  la  maniere  d'agacer  un  chien  et  de  le  mettre  en  colere  (encore 
faut-il  vouloir  le  mettre  en  colere)  ou  celle  par  laquelle  on  impose  le  silence 
(car  le  silence  n'a  pas  toujours  besoin  d'etre  impose)  n'ont  une  valeur  uni- 
verselle,  et  encore  moins  naturelle.  Le  Ian  gage  s'apprend,  dans  ses  manifes- 
tations les  plus  humbles.  II  semble  done  que  la  reflexion  linguistique  des  maitres 
de  Port-Royal  soit  nettement  superieure  a  celle  du  Pere  Jesuite,  meme  si 
certaines  de  leurs  etymologies  grecques  sont  abusives.  Labbe  a  tort  d'ecrire: 
"Les  fagons  d'exprimer  les  divers  tons  et  accens  de  nostre  langue,  viennent 
aussi  du  grec,  de  I'hebreu,  de  I'arabe,  du  breton,  du  basque  ou  de  quelques 
autres  langues  estrangeres."^^^ 

On  pourrait  faire  les  memes  remarques  a  propos  de  I'exemple  qu'il  donne 
de  ahan  ou  ahanner,  exprimant  I'effort  physique  de  quelqu'un  a  qui  manque 
le  souffle.  Ici  encore,  il  se  met  en  retrait  de  ceux  qui  font  venir  ces  mots,  non 
de  la  nature,  mais  du  latin  anhelitus  ou  anhelare.  Et  I'anecdote  qu'il  conte  a  ce 
sujet^^'  est,  dans  un  autre  genre,  aussi  naive  que  les  bouts-rimes  de  Port- 
Royal. 

En  rattachant  maman  au  grec  (X(i[X[xr)  et  papa  egalement  a  son  equivalent 
grec,  je  ne  sais  pas  si  Lancelot  a  tort  ou  raison,  mais  Labbe  a  certainement 
tort  quand  il  parle,  ici  encore,  de  langage  naturel  a  tous  les  petits  enfants, 
sous  pretexte  que  dans  toutes  les  langues,  ou  du  moins  dans  celles  qu'il  dit 
connaitre  — le  grec,  le  latin,  le  frangais,  I'italien,  I'espagnol  —  ce  sont  des  mots 
tres  proches  les  uns  des  autres  qui  expriment  la  meme  realite  affective:  c'est, 
ecrit  Labbe,  la  nature  qui  I'a  appris  a  tous  ces  enfants,  de  quelque  nationalite 
qu'ils  soient.  Ainsi  le  papin  serait  une  bouillie,  "nourriture  ordinaire  de  ceux 
qui  disent  papa  en  commengant  a  begayer."^^^ 

Un  autre  exemple  sera  pris  avec  le  verbe  coaxer,  que  les  maitres  de  Port- 
Royal  rattachent  (Jardin,  p.  104)  au  x6aE  de  la  comedie  des  Grenouilles  d'A- 
ristophane,  mais  que  Labbe  rattache  encore  au  cri  naturel  des  grenouilles,  sans 
passer  par  I'intermediaire  d'un  auteur,   d'un   texte  ou   d'un  dictionnaire: 


456  BATAILLE  DES  "lATINISEURS"  ET  "hELLENISEURS" 

"Coaxer,  ecrit-il,  mot  naturel  a  toutes  les  langues  qui  voudront  imiter  le  coax 
des  grenouilles.  II  n'est  nuUement  pairticulier  aux  Grecs,  quoy  qu'Aristophane 
en  bouffonnant  s'en  soit  servy  en  une  de  ses  comedies,  non  plus  que  le  xoi 
xot  des  petits  gorrins  etc.  Le  moindre  paysan  qui  n'a  jamais  appris  ny  grec 
ny  latin,  en  dira  bien  autant.  xotCetv  xoc  xoiptSta  [xt[ir)Tixw?  Xeyexai  dit  He- 
syche  fort  a  propos." 

Le  debat,  on  I'a  vu,  s'est  deplace:  il  ne  s'agit  plus  de  rapprocher  le  frangais 
du  latin  plutot  que  du  grec,  mais  d'exprimer  un  naturalisme  ou  un  empirisme 
naif  ou  non  theorise,  par  opposition  a  une  conception  rationnelle  du  Ian- 
gage,  dans  toutes  les  manifestations  ou  il  a  I'occasion  de  s'exprimer,  meme 
les  moins  litteraires.  Sans  avoir  encore  produit  de  linguistique  comparee,  les 
maitres  de  Port-Royal,  en  elaborant  une  grammaire  raisonnee  et  generale 
et  un  traite  de  Logique,  etaient  certainement  mieux  prepares  que  le  Pere 
Jesuite  pour  reflechir  au  probleme  de  I'origine  ou  de  I'essence  du  Ian  gage, 
et  reintegrer  les  onomatopees  dans  un  systeme  general  de  la  fonction  lin- 
guistique, comme  on  dirait  depuis  Saussure,  dans  une  theorie  des  rapports 
entre  le  signifie  et  le  signifiant.  L'article  besler  dujardin  II  (p.  326)  — que  Ton 
pourra  comparer  a  celui  de  Labbe^^'^  — est  interessant  a  cet  egard  et  resume 
bien  I'attitude  des  grammairiens  de  Port-Royal:  ''Besler,  pris  du  son  des  brebis, 
a  rapport  a  balare  (notons  cette  expression  prudente),  fait  de  (BXax^tv  dorien, 
pour  pXrJxetv,  car  les  Romains  en  beaucoup  de  choses  ont  imite  les  Doriens. 
Or  il  faut  prendre  garde  que  les  mots  faits  par  imitation  du  son,  quelquefois 
les  peuples  les  ont  formes  immediatement,  de  ce  son  meme,  et  quelquefois 
par  I'imitation  de  la  voix  deja  usitee  chez  leurs  voisins.  Ce  que  je  supplie  le 
lecteur  de  remarquer,  parce  que  souvent  nostre  censeur  nous  reprend  de  n'a- 
voir  pas  eu  recours  a  cette  figure  qu'on  nomme  onomatopee,  comme  si  elle  em- 
peschoit  qu'on  n'eut  forme  les  mots  a  I'imitation  de  ceux  mesmes  qui  estoient 
deja  usitez  chez  les  autres  peuples."  Et  il  cite  Y Etymologique  latin  de  Vossius,^^^ 
autorite  egalement  respectee  par  Labbe,  comme  on  I'a  vu,  qui  ecrit  au  sujet 
de  ce  meme  verbe,  ou  plutot  du  latin  balare:  "a  sono  vocis  factum,  ut  bene 
scribit  Charisius,  1.  IV  et  Festus,  in  barrire.""  Et  il  ajoute  en  latin  ce  que  Lan- 
celot a  exprime  en  frangais:  "Aliis  placet  id  verbum  factum  esse  a  Dorico  pXdt- 
Xetv  pro  (BXt)X£Iv,  Romani  enim  in  multis  imitati  sunt  Dores." 

Ironisant  a  I'egard  de  celui  qu'il  appelle  presque  toujours  "notre  censeur" 
ou  le  "censeur  universel,"  Lancelot  s'indigne  egalement  aupres  de  son  lecteur, 
qu'il  prend  a  temoin,  de  I'audace  de  son  accusateur,  qui  s'adresse  a  I'Acade- 
mie  Frangaise  pour  instruire  le  proces  de  son  ouvrage.  II  faut  se  souvenir  que 
Labbe  avait  parle  du  "renversement  general  et  de  la  ruine  presque  totale  du 
langage,  que  nous  avons  regu  de  nos  ancestres  depuis  douze  ou  treize  sie- 
cles!"*^^  "C'est  une  affaire,  disait-il  encore  dans  son  epitre  aux  Academiciens, 
de  la  plus  haute  importance."  Pour  montrer  le  ridicule  qu'il  y  a  a  reprocher 
aux  auteurs  dujardin  d'etre  alles  chercher  des  mots  grecs  dans  leur  pays  d'ori- 


JEAN-CLAUDE  MARGOLIN  457 

gine,  en  semblant  oublier  "qu'ils  ne  sont  pas  venus  en  France  sans  passer  par 
le  pays  latin,"  il  se  sert  d'une  comparaison:  les  cabinets  de  la  Chine  passent 
par  la  Hollande  avant  de  venir  en  France:  n'en  demeurent-ils  pas  pour  autant 
de  veritables  cabinets  de  Chine? 

De  plus,  dans  sa  methode  d'amalgame,  Labbe  n'a  pas  tenu  compte  des  trois 
categories  de  mots  frangais  examines  dans  cet  ouvrage:  ceux  qui  sont  entiere- 
ment  grecs,  ceux  qui  ont  leur  veritable  etymologic  dans  le  grec,  et  enfm  ceux 
qui,  dans  leur  comparaison,  ne  mettent  en  jeu  que  des  allusions. 

Nous  ne  passerons  certes  pas  en  revue  les  differents  articles  du  Jardin  I  qui 
avaient  ete  rallies  par  Labbe  dans  ses  Etymologies,  et  que  reprend  le  Jardin 
II,  sans  en  modifier  la  teneur  mais  en  ripostant  a  son  censeur.  Nous  nous  con- 
tenterons,  pour  caracteriser  le  type  d'argumentation  de  Lancelot,  d'un  ou  deux 
articles  dans  lesquels  le  Jesuite  s'etait  montre  particulierement  severe,  ou 
meme  odieux.  Par  exemple,  I'article  siffler,  que  nous  avions  deja  note.  Lan- 
celot renvoie  a  Estienne,  que  ne  citait  pas  le  P.  Labbe:  argument  d'autorite 
qui  ne  nous  satisfait  evidemment  pas.^^^  Deuxieme  argument,  lui  aussi  d'au- 
torite  (et  qui  ne  peut  pas  nous  satisfaire  davantage):  "si  Ton  aime  passer  par  le 
latin,''  Vossius  lui-meme,  dans  son  Dictionnaire  etymologique  fait  venir  sibilo 
de  ai^Xoco.  Quant  a  I'allusion  Rosne  ou  Rhosne,  To8av6(;,  Rhodanus,  de  po8- 
avi^w  agito  (avec  reference,  pour  le  verbe  grec,  au  commentaire  d'Eustathe), 
qui  avait  suscite  force  railleries  de  la  part  d'un  homme  qui  avait  ecrit  — ou 
pille,  disent  ses  adversaires  —  des  ouvrages  de  geographic  linguistique,  I'ar- 
gument  est  celui  de  la  vraisemblance  ou  de  I'analogie:  le  verbe  grec  signifie 
agiter,  et  les  flots  du  fleuve  Rhone  sont  evidemment  agites.  Nous  aime- 
rions,  pour  notre  part,  plus  de  considerations  d'ordre  historique  de  la  part  des 
grammairiens  de  Port-Royal. 

J'ai  intitule  ma  conference  "La  bataille  des  latiniseurs  et  des  helleniseurs 
au  XVIF  siecle,"  et  j'ai  essaye,  chemin  faisant,  d'en  justifier  le  titre,  non 
seulement  a  cause  des  expressions  d'"hellenistes"  ou  de  "jeunes  hellenistes" 
dont  le  P.  Labbe  se  sert  continuellement  pour  discrediter,  pense-t-il,  ses  ad- 
versaires, mais  aussi  a  cause  de  sa  conception  de  la  proximite  dans  le  temps, 
I'espace  et  la  morphologic,  des  mots  frangais  par  rapport  aux  mots  latins. 
Des  expressions  qui  reviennent  aussi  constamment  sous  sa  plume  sont  celles 
de  "nos  provinces,"  "nos  regions,"  par  opposition  aux  lointaines  contrees  de 
la  Grece.  Ne  parlait-il  pas,  a  propos  de  I'etymologie  du  mot  coin  qu'il  fait  venir 
(a  juste  titre)  du  latin  cuneus,  d'un  vocable  d'au-dela  des  mers  (il  utilise  I'ad- 
iectii  transmarinum),  le  grec  ywvCa?  Le  latin  serait  done  le  vivier  ou  la  nourrice 
des  langues  romanes,  en  particulier  du  frangais,  de  I'italien  et  de  I'espagnol, 
et  s'il  est  vrai  que  la  langue  de  Ciceron  a  beaucoup  emprunte  a  celle  de  Pla- 
ton,  il  ne  saurait  admettre  que  les  Messieurs  de  Port-Royal  rapprochent  phy- 
siquement  (si  Ton  peut  dire)  dans  leur  livre  imprime  le  mot  frangais  du  mot  grec, 


45B  BATAILLE  DES  "lATINISEURS"  ET  "hELLENISEURS" 

car  le  fils  doit  etre  rapproche  de  la  mere  plutot  que  de  Taieule! 

Mais  quels  sont  les  enjeux  veritables  de  cette  escarmouche  dont  les  pre- 
mieres salves  ont  ete  tirees  par  le  Pere  Labbe,  la  riposte  venant  trois  ans 
plus  tard?  Reconnaissons  que  les  objections  de  Labbe,  qu'elles  lui  soient  pro- 
pres  ou  qu'il  les  ait  empruntees  a  d'autres,  sont  sou  vent  fort  exactes.  Ad- 
mettons  aussi  que  I'amour  du  grec  et  la  familiarite  avec  une  langue  qui  n'etait 
encore  connue  que  par  un  petit  nombre  d'erudits  ont  fait  commettre  bien  des 
bevues  aux  plus  grands  savants  du  XVP  et  du  XVIF  siecle.  Labbe,  appa- 
remment,  ne  fait  pas  qu'etaler  sa  connaissance  du  grec  quand  il  renvoie  avec 
ironie  et  de  fagon  peremptoire  les  auteurs  du  Jardin  a  ces  bons  lexicographes 
qui  s'appellent  Hesychius  ou  Suidas:  ses  notices  et  certains  de  ses  ouvrages  mon- 
trent  qu'il  n'avait  aucune  allergic  a  I'egard  de  cette  langue.  Quant  a  Lan- 
celot, il  s'est  suffisamment  interesse  au  latin  pour  ecrire  une  Nouvelle  methode 
pour  apprendre  la  langue  latine.  Alors,  me  dira-t-on,  ne  faut-il  voir  dans  ce  debat 
d'un  "latiniseur"  contre  des  "greciseurs"  qu'un  faux  debat,  qui  en  cache  un 
autre?  Des  le  debut  j'ai  rappele  la  situation  politico-religieuse  des  annees 
1645-1665,  et  les  perils  qu'en  cette  annee  precise  1661  I'Assemblee  du  clerge 
et  le  gouvernement  du  roi  faisaient  courir  a  la  communaute  janseniste  tout 
entiere,  et  a  tous  les  esprits  qui  s'inspiraient  de  sa  doctrine  ou  de  ses  methodes. 
Quand  on  lit  des  phrases  comme  celles-ci  sous  la  plume  du  Pere  Jesuite,  dans 
son  Avertissement  aux  lecteurs: 

Mais  Dieu  s'est  oppose  a  leurs  pernicieux  desseins  (il  s'agit  des  Janse- 
nistes),  ayant  inspire  a  notre  Tres-Chrestien  Monarque,  Louis  XIV, 
la  resolution  de  defendre  et  empecher  toutes  les  assemblees  illicites  de 
cette  Secte,  ou  la  jeunesse  etait  instruite  dans  les  maximes  dangereuses 
du  jansenisme,  et  sugoit  des  le  berceau,  pour  ainsi  dire,  le  laict  d'une 
des  plus  damnables  heresies,  qui  ait  jamais  attaque  I'Eglise, 

on  ne  peut  vraiment  plus  s'essayer  a  mesurer  les  dires  des  uns  ou  de  I'autre 
a  I'aune  de  la  linguistique  ou  de  I'etymologie.  II  serait  encore  plus  vain,  quel 
qu'ait  pu  etre  le  talent  de  polemiste  de  Lancelot,  d'Isaac  Le  Maistre,  ou  de 
Philippe  Labbe,  de  voir  en  ces  debats  lexicographiques  I'expression  exacerbee 
d'une  erudition  pedantesque. 

II  faut,  je  crois,  penetrer  plus  avant,  si  Ton  veut  essayer  de  trouver  les  mo- 
tivations reelles  de  ce  debat  qui  prete  a  sourire,  a  un  premier  degre,  mais 
dont  le  sens  nous  apparait  sans  doute  plus  clairement  aujourd'hui  qu'a  I'epoque 
meme  ou  il  avait  lieu.  Que  represente  en  effet  I'inspiration  des  Jansenistes 
dans  le  debat  pedagogique  et  culturel  que  souleve  la  querelle  des  "latiniseurs" 
et  des  "greciseurs"?  Pour  essayer  de  la  comprendre,  il  n'est  pas  mauvais  d'evo- 
quer  un  autre  debat,  une  autre  querelle,  nee  a  I'aube  de  la  Renaissance, 
marquee  par  la  controverse  de  Politien  et  de  Paolo  Cortese,  culminant  avec 
Erasme,  Alberto  Pio,  prince  de  Carpi,  Scaliger  et  Dolet,  irriguant  et  irritant 


JEAN-CLAUDE  MARGOLIN  ^^g 

d'autres  controverses,  tout  au  long  du  XVF  siecle,  et  loin  d'etre  apaisee  a 
I'epoque  qui  nous  occupe:  la  querelle  du  Ciceronianus.  On  sait  bien  desormais 
que  ce  debat  linquistique  est  en  realite  un  debat  d'ordre  culturel,  d'ordre  re- 
ligieux,  d'ordre  philosophique  au  sens  le  plus  profond  du  terme.  Pauvrete, 
et  en  meme  temps  polysemie  des  mots,  dont  la  richesse  de  connotations  les 
vide  de  toute  denotation  conceptuelle:  faut-il  choisir  entre  etre  ciceronien  ou 
etre  chretien?^^^  Le  ciceronien-cicerolatre  n'est-il  pas  a  I'oppose  du  "vrai" 
ciceronien  de  style  erasmien?  Y  a-t-il  pour  un  chretien  un  bon  usage  du  pa- 
ganisme,  quand  des  paiens  s'appellent  Platon,  Aristote,  Ciceron  ou  Seneque? 
La  naissance  et  le  developpement  de  la  Reforme  ne  faciliteront  pas  la  reponse 
a  cette  question. 

Si  cette  problematique,  a  laquelle  aucune  reponse  theorique  n'a  jamais 
pu  ni  ne  pourra  jamais  convenir,  est  transposee  au  niveau  et  dans  le  contexte 
socio-historique  ou  nous  avons  decide  de  nous  situer,  nous  serons  obliges 
de  nous  demander  a  notre  tour:  que  represente  le  grec,  que  represente  le  latin 
dans  I'univers  culturel  du  milieu  du  siecle  dit  de  Louis  XIV?  Mieux  encore, 
puisqu'a  la  verite,  il  s'agit  de  la  langue  fran^aise,  a  laquelle  tous  sont  pas- 
sionnement  attaches,  que  represente-t-elle,  notamment  pour  les  maitres  de 
Port-Royal,  que  represente-t-elle  en  dehors  d'eux?  Comment  voient-ils  dans 
la  formation  de  la  jeunesse  dont  ils  se  disputent  la  clientele,  I'articulation  de 
cette  langue  dont  ils  sont  fiers  et  que  certains  d'entre  eux  porteront  a  son  eclat 
supreme,  avec  ces  langues  anciennes  qui  formaient,  et  qui  forment  encore  la 
base  de  toute  education  humaniste? 

Voici  les  hypotheses  que  je  proposerai  en  forme  de  reponses  et  de  conclu- 
sion generale:  Si  en  France  les  Jesuites  constituent  toujours  une  puissance 
politique,  religieuse  et  culturelle  dont  les  effets  se  manifestent  partout,  leur 
pedagogic,  quoi  qu'ait  pu  en  dire  le  Pere  de  Dainville  dans  les  excellents  tra- 
vaux  qu'il  leur  a  consacres,^^^  n'a  plus  le  dynamisme  de  la  nouveaute  ou  le 
jaillissement  createur  de  la  seconde  moitie  du  XVP  siecle,  et  de  la  premiere 
partie  du  XVIP.  lis  poursuivent  une  tradition  humaniste  et  erasmienne  ou 
le  latin  continue  d'etre  considere  et  pratique  en  fait  comme  le  foyer  rever- 
berateur  de  toutes  les  disciplines  enseignees.  C'est  toujours  par  rapport  au 
latin  et  a  sa  grammaire  que  sont  conceptualisees  les  regies  de  la  grammaire 
frangaise  ou  que  sont  enoncees  ses  categories:  Sc2diger  et  Sanchez  le  gram- 
mairien  sont  toujours  les  maitres  de  la  science  grammaticale.  La  modernite 
est  incontestablement  du  cote  du  jansenisme.  Ce  n'est  pas  I'effet  du  hasard 
si  la  premiere  grammaire  generale  ou  grammaire  comparee  de  I'histoire  de 
rOccident  ait  ete  congue  par  les  maitres  de  Port-Royal,  et  si  cette  gram- 
maire a  fait  passer  Vimperium  de  Rome  a  Paris,  du  latin  au  frangais.  Desor- 
mais, c'est  a  partir  du  fran^ais  et  d'une  grammaire  ecrite  en  frangais  que 
les  autres  langues,  y  compris  le  grec  et  le  latin,  seront  raisonnSes,  c'est-^-dire 
rationnellement  pensees.  N'oublions  pas  que  le  Discours  de  la  Methode  avait  6t6 


460  BATAILLE  DES  "lATINISEURS"  ET  "hELLENISEURS" 

ecrit  en  frangais  par  un  certain  Descartes,  plus  proche  de  I'esprit  janseniste 
que  de  la  tradition  jesuite,  qui  I'avait  pourtant  "nourri  aux  lettres  des  son  en- 
fance,"  mais  dont  il  avait  par  la  suite  rejete  le  joug  pour  ne  pas  se  laisser  en- 
vahir  par  Tempirisme  de  la  repetition  et  une  rhetorique  sterilisante.  Pour 
les  pionniers  d'une  grammaire  nouvelle,  le  grec,  le  latin,  I'italien,  I'espagnol 
—  pour  nous  limiter  aux  langues  qu'ils  maitrisaient  et  auxquelles  ils  avaient 
consacre  une  methode  nouvelle  d'apprentissage  — constituent  autant  d'echan- 
tillons  ou  d'illustrations  d'une  methode  generale  de  pensee  et  de  dire.  On 
comprend  alors  que,  sans  vouloir  etablir  de  hierarchic  ontologique,  logique 
ou  historique  entre  les  langues,  tout  en  reconnaissant  des  families  et  des  filia- 
tions linguistiques,  ils  aient  eu  tendance  a  favoriser,  voire  a  majorer  abusive- 
ment  le  rapprochement  du  grec  et  du  frangais  d'un  point  de  vue  rationaliste 
et  experimental  a  la  fois  au  detriment  du  latin.  Car  ces  rapprochements,  meme 
insolites,  et  — disons-le  — objectivement  faux  et  temeraires,  leur  permettaient 
de  reflechir  a  neuf  sur  la  structure  des  mots,  et  notamment  des  mots  frangais. 
Le  latin,  par  son  usage  constant,  et  par  son  imperialisme  seculaire,  comme, 
a  un  moindre  degre,  I'italien  au  XVF  siecle  par  rapport  aux  autres  langues 
vernaculaires,  ne  permettait  sans  doute  pas  — ou  plus  — I'experimentation  a  vif 
du  frangais.  II  y  a  meme,  dans  des  etymologies  qui  faisaient  ricaner  le  P.  Labbe 
et  qui  nous  font  sourire  aujourd'hui,  des  essais  experimentaux  qui  ressemblent, 
toutes  proportions  gardees  a  la  methode  des  essais  et  des  erreurs  pratiquee 
par  les  physiciens.  En  refusant  au  latin  un  statut  d'universalite  et  d'omnipo- 
tence  que  rien  d'ailleurs  ne  justifiait,  et  que  les  philologues  germaniques  avaient 
beau  jeu  de  denoncer  en  montrant  la  fecondite  et  la  generosite  de  la  langue 
allemande,  les  maitres  de  Port-Royal  ont  permis  un  reveil  de  la  philologie  fran- 
gaise,  un  essor  de  la  philologie  comparee,  profitable  meme  a  la  langue  latine. 
Mais  leurs  rapprochements,  parfois  hasardeux,  leur  utilisation  abusive  de  la 
methode  des  allusions,  meme  animee  des  meilleures  intentions  pedagogiques, 
avaient  leurs  dangers:  leurs  erreurs  ont  ete  sans  doute  le  prix  qu'il  fallait  payer 
a  I'audace  en  tournant  le  dos  a  la  routine. 

Les  choses  sont  evidemment  moins  simples  que  les  formules  par  lesquelles 
on  essaie  de  les  exprimer.  On  sait  en  particulier  que  la  Ratio  studiorum,  des- 
tinee  aux  colleges  de  la  Compagnie  de  Jesus,  participait  elle  aussi  de  la  con- 
science intellectuelle  moderne,  et  que  I'esprit  cartesien  ne  hantait  pas  seulement 
les  allees  de  Port-Royal.  Nombre  de  Jesuites  etaient  animes  par  une  exi- 
gence de  methode  qui  ne  le  cedait  en  rien  aux  maitres  Jansenistes.  II  n'empe- 
che:  le  latin,  puisque  c'est  de  lui  qu'il  s'agit,  symbolisait,  par  I'unite, 
I'universalite  de  sa  langue,  et  par  ses  regies  canoniques,  I'unite  de  la  foi  et 
I'unite  des  esprits.  Mais  n'etait-ce  pas  le  but,  plus  ou  moins  clairement  avoue, 
de  tous  ceux  qui  s'etaient  assignes  pour  tache  principale  la  formation  de  la 
jeunesse?  En  un  pareil  domaine  et  pour  un  tel  combat,  les  solitaires  de  Port- 
Royal  et  les  disciples  de  Loyola  ne  le  cedaient  en  rien  aux  Oratoriens,  aux 


JEAN-CLAUDE  MARGOLIN  461 

Minimes  ou  aux  instituteurs  de  I'Europe  reformee.  Meme  esprit  de  ratio- 
nalisation, meme  volonte  de  formalisation  et  d'unification  pedagogique  que 
celui  ou  celle  qui  preside  a  la  redaction  des  Nouvelles  methodes  pour  ap- 
prendre  les  langues  grecque,  latine,  italienne  ou  espagnole,  ou  a  celle  de  la 
Grammaire  generate  et  raisonnee  de  1660.  Pour  citer  deux  grands  pedagogues, 
I'un  Allemand  et  appartenant  a  la  generation  precedente,  I'autre  Tcheque 
et  contemporain  de  nos  protagonistes,  a  savoir  Wolfgang  Ratichius^^^  et 
Amos  Comenius,^^^  on  reconnaitra  sans  peine  que  leurs  Didactique,  Pampedie 
ou  Pansophie  procedent  de  cet  ars  discendi  et  docendi,  a  la  recherche  des  voies 
les  plus  courtes  et  les  plus  commodes  pour  mettre  les  enfants,  hommes  de  de- 
main,  en  possession  du  capital  culturel  de  I'humanite. 

Cela  etant  dit,  des  differences  subsistent,  et  meme  des  orientations  op- 
posees  entre  la  methode  de  Port-Royal  et  celle  des  Jesuites,  dont  le  P.  Labbe 
n'est  sans  doute  pas  le  representant  le  moins  contestable  intellectuellement. 
A  Tempirisme  naturaliste  ou  pragmatiste  de  I'un  s'oppose  la  rationalisation  cul- 
turelle  de  I'autre,  comme  au  naturalisme  animiste  de  certains  de  ses  adver- 
saires,  Descartes  oppose  une  nature  mecanisee  et  rationalisee,  une  nature 
mathematisee.  II  etait  naturel  qu'en  composant  leur  grammaire  ou  "art  de 
parler"  et  en  rendant  hommage  aux  "caracteres  de  I'ecriture,  que  les  Grecs 
appellent  grammata/'  Arnauld  et  Lancelot  aient  ete  amenes  a  mettre  le  latin 
en  retrait.  II  etait  normal  qu'il  perdit  son  monopole  culturel.  II  ne  saurait  y 
avoir  qu'une  grammaire,  comme  il  n'y  a  qu'une  logique:  dans  cette  entreprise 
de  relativisation  des  grammaires  des  langues  particulieres,  il  etait  naturel  que 
le  grec,  qui  n'avait  jamais  eu  le  monopole  du  latin  dans  notre  civilisation  hu- 
maniste  et  occidentale,  ait  ete,  meme  abusivement,  exhausse.  Or  ce  sont  pour- 
tant  les  plus  grands  humanistes  qui,  par  leur  amour  du  grec,  ont  contribue 
a  cette  relative  decheance  du  monopole  culturel  du  latin.  L'association  de  Lan- 
celot et  d'Amauld  est  significative:  le  premier  est  avant  tout  litteraire  et  helle- 
niste,  le  second  philosophe  et  theologien.  La  connaissance  et  I'amour  du  grec 
permet  au  premier  d'approfondir,  meme  temerairement,  la  connaissance  du 
frangais.  Mais,  comme  il  I'ecrit  dans  sa  preface:  "L'engagement  ou  je  me  suis 
trouve  de  travailler  aux  grammaires  de  diverses  langues  m'a  souvent  porte 
a  rechercher  les  raisons  de  plusieurs  choses  qui  sont  communes  a  toutes  les 
langues,  ou  particulieres  a  quelques-unes;  mais  y  ayant  quelquefois  trouve 
des  difficultes  qui  m'arretaient,  je  les  ai  communiquees  a  un  de  mes  amis." 
Cet  ami  etait  evidemment  Arnauld,  dont  la  tache  sera  de  mener  a  bien  une 
epistemologie  philosophique  et  comparative,  une  meta-linguistique,  comme 
nous  dirions  aujourd'hui.  Et  la  Logique  ou  I'art  depenser  devait  completer  la  Gram- 
maire generate. 

Je  pense  done,  en  defmitive,  que  le  grec  constituait  pour  les  maitres  de 
Port-Royal,  une  sorte  de  propedeutique  ascetique  a  leurs  reflexions  linguis- 
tiques  et  philosophiques  sur  une  grammaire  generale  et  raisonnee.  Le  latin, 


462  BATAILLE  DES  "lATINISEURS"  ET  "hELLENISEURS" 

qu'ils  connaissaient  pourtant  fort  bien,  ne  pouvait  en  aucune  fagon  leur  servir 
au  meme  titre  de  modele  intrumental.  En  effet,  nourris  du  latin  avant  de  I'etre 
du  grec,  pratiquant  journellement  une  langue  romane  dont  les  attardes  d'un 
humanisme  frileux  auraient  dit  qu'elle  n'etait  qu'un  latin  corrompu  ou  aba- 
tardi,  ils  etaient  trop  immerges  dans  un  univers  culturel  oii  le  latin  jouait 
un  role  de  discriminateur  social,  pour  ne  pas  prendre  quelque  distance  avec 
lui.  A  la  proximite,  a  la  familiarite  ou  a  I'usage  du  latin,  ils  opposaient 
I'eloignement,  I'etrangete  et  la  rationalite  des  racines  grecques  et  de  leur  ac- 
climation en  sol  frangais.  Une  telle  volonte  rationnelle  ne  va  pas  sans  peril, 
et  cette  aventure  intellectuelle,  temperee  par  des  considerations  pratiques  d'or- 
dre  educatif,  a  pu  rencontrer  les  echecs  auxquels  de  tout  temps  se  sont  vo- 
lontairement  exposes  tous  les  inventeurs,  tous  les  createurs  de  methodes 
nouvelles  dans  quelque  domaine  que  ce  fut.  Malgre  les  bevues  reelles  du 
Jardin  des  racines  grecques  et  ses  naivetes  pedagogiques  qui  ne  justifiaient  en 
rien  les  attaques  personnelles  et  humiliantes  du  Pere  Labbe,  cette  oeuvre,  mise 
dans  la  perspective  que  j'ai  essaye  de  tracer,  a  plus  de  poids  et  de  densite  his- 
torique  que  les  Etymologies  des  motsfrangois,  et  la  plupart  des  ouvrages  de  com- 
pilation du  Jesuite  frangais!  II  est  vrai  que  I'auteur  du  Triumphus  veritatis  catholicae 
et  de  la  Bibliotheca  anti-janseniana,  applaudissant  a  la  fermeture  des  Petites  Ecoles, 
etait  plus  preoccupe  par  la  cause  politico-religieuse  qu'il  soutenait,  que  par 
la  defense  du  latin,  soi-disant  malmene  par  les  "helleniseurs"  nouveaux.  La 
linguistique  et  la  theorie  des  langues  modernes  resteront  encore  longtemps  sous 
la  dependance  du  latin,  et  la  Grammaire  generale  elle-meme  trouve  dans  la 
grammaire  latine  son  application  la  meilleure.  Le  nationalisme  gallican  de  la 
Grammaire  generale,  ecrite  en  frangais  et  reconnaissant  a  cette  langue,  plus 
d'un  siecle  avant  Rivarol,  une  preponderance  europeenne,  n'est  en  aucune 
fagon  parti  en  guerre  contre  le  latin:  les  faits  historiques,  comme  la  raison, 
s'opposent  a  une  telle  hypothese.  Mais  I'autorite  du  latin  et  du  grec  poussera 
les  grammairiens  et  les  linguistes  nouveaux  a  analyser  en  profondeur  des  lan- 
gues, comme  le  frangais,  I'italien  ou  I'espagnol  — d'autres  le  feront  pour  I'an- 
glais,  I'allemand,  etc.— qui  s'en  ecartent  sur  certains  points.  Si  au  lieu  de 
rencontrer  sur  leur  chemin  un  Pere  Labbe,  les  maitres  de  Port-Royal  avaient 
pu  "disputer"avec  un  Pere  Bouhours  ou  un  Pere  Caussin,  il  n'y  aurait  cer- 
tainement  pas  eu  de  bataille  des  "latiniseurs"  contre  les  "helleniseurs." 

Centre  d'Etudes  Superieures  de  la  Renaissance 

Tours 


JEAN-CLAUDE  MARGOLIN  463 

Notes 


1.  J'avais  presente  en  decembre  1983  a  Los  Angeles  une  conference  intitulee: 
"Science  et  nationalisme  linguistiques,  ou  la  bataille  pour  I'etymologie"  {The  Fairest  Flower, 
Firenze,  1985)  pp.  139-65.  Voir  aussi  mon  article  sur  "Glarean,  commentateur  du  De 
hello  Gallico,"  dans  Presence  de  Cesar,  "Caesarodunum  XXbis,"  ed.  R.  Chevallier  (Paris: 
Belles-Lettres,  1985)  pp.  183-212. 

2.  Le  Jardin  des  Racines  grecques  mises  enfrangois,  Paris,  Le  Petit,  1657,  in- 12  . 

3.  Etymologies  de plusieurs  mots Jrangais  .  .  .,  (Paris:  Guillaume  et  Simon  Benard,  1661) 
in-12°. 

4.  Voir  C.  Sommervogel,  Bihliotheque  de  la  Compagnie  de  Jesus,  t.  IV,  col.  1295-1328: 
83  titres  y  sont  recenses.  L'ouvrage  que  nous  evoquons  est  le  n°  64.  Ne  a  Bourges 
le  10  juillet  1607,  le  Pere  Labbe  enseigna  la  rhetorique,  la  philosophic  et  la  theologie 
au  College  de  Clermont. 

5.  Paris,  M.  David,  1556. 

6.  Geneve,  1565. 

7.  Paris,  P.  Nivellius,  1554. 

8.  Voir  "Un  helleniste  du  XVI^  siecle.  Excellence  de  I'affmite  de  la  langue  grecque 
avec  la  frangaise,"  edite,  avec  une  introduction,  par  H.  Omont,  Revue  des  Etudes  grec 
ques  9  (1917). 

9.  Geneve,  1576. 

10.  Une  erreur  typographique  fait  dire  a  Labbe  (5^  page  de  son  Avertissement  aux 
lecteurs)  que  ''Le  Jardin  des  Racines  grecques  mises  en  Francois,  avec  un  Traitte  des  Prepositions 
..."  a  ete  "imprime  I'an  1647,  par  le  soin,  a  ce  qu'on  disoit,  de  quelques  partisans 
du  Jansenisme.  .  .  ."  Outre  que  cette  date  est  fausse  (toutes  les  biographies  consultees 
donnent  bien  la  date  de  1637),  I'allusion  du  P.  Labbe  a  son  livre  de  1648  et  surtout 
les  remarques  qui  suivent  n'auraient  plus  aucun  sens:  ".  .  .  Je  m'enquis  s'il  y  avoit  quel- 
qu'un  qui  eust  travaille  depuis  moy  sur  le  mesme  sujet.  On  me  fit  voir  en  mesme  temps 
un  petit  livre.  ..." 

11.  Paris,  Le  Petit,  1664,  in-12,  388  pages  (au  lieu  des  370  de  la  premiere  edition, 
puisqu'il  doit  repondre  a  son  adversaire  en  le  contre-attaquant). 

12.  Triumphus  Catholicae  Veritatis  .  .  .,  Paris,  Seb.  et  Gabr.  Cramoisy,  Via  lacobaea, 
cum  privilegio  Regis  Christianissimi. 

13.  Pour  I'histoire  de  Port-Royal,  voir  le  classique  Port-Royal  de  Sainte-Beuve  (ed. 
R.-L.  Doyon  et  Ch.  Marchesne,  9  vols.  (Paris,  1926-1928),  mais  aussi  les  ouvrages 
de  L.  Cognet,  La  Mere  Angelique  et  son  temps,  2  vols.  (Sulliver,  1950-1952)  et  Claude 
Lancelot,  solitaire  de  Port-Royal  (SuWiver,  1950).  Sur  la  theologie  de  Port-Royal,  voir  Jean 
Laporte,  La  doctrine  de  Port- Royal,  2  vols.  (Paris:  PUF,  1951-1952).  Sur  le  jansenisme, 
voir  les  travaux  de  Jean  Orcibal  reunis  sous  le  titre  collectif,  Les  origines  du  Jansenisme 
(Paris:  Vrin,  1954). 

14.  Ce  dernier  n'avait  rejoint  le  groupe  des  Solitaires  qu'en  1649.  Raison  de  plus 
pour  infirmer  la  date  de  1647,  precedemment  critiquee. 

15.  Epistre,  a4r. 

16.  Ibid.,  a4v. 

17.  Ibid.,  a5r. 

18.  Ibid.,  aSr. 

19.  Ibid.,  a5v. 

20.  Ibid. ,  a7v.  Voir  Etymologic  des  motsfrangais  qui  tirent  leur  origine  de  la  langue  grecque 


464  BATAILLE  DES  "lATINISEURS"  ET  "hELl6nISEURS" 

.  .  .  (Paris:  C.  Le  Beau,  1643)  (BN,  X.13658,  et  Res.X.1994). 

21.  Ibid.,  e2r-v. 

22.  Nous  nous  servirons  essentiellement,  a  titre  de  contre-epreuve,  du  Grand  La- 
rousse  de  la  Langue  frangaise  (GLLF). 

23.  Voir  plus  loin,  p.  455  et  n.  105. 

24.  Advertissement,  e5r-v. 

25.  Par  exemple,  a  propos  de  Jansenius:  "CORNELIUS  JANSENIUS,  qui  gente 
HoUandus,  patria  Leerdamensis,  inter  haereticos  educatus  a  puero,  turn  Lovanii  in  Jan- 
sonii  Baianarum  partium  antistis  disciplinam  traditus,  atque  in  Gallia  frequenti  Joan- 
nis  Vergerii,  nondum  Sancti  Sigyranni  Abbatis,  consortio  corruptus,  adversum 
Catholicos  Theologiae  Scholasticae  Professores,  livore  suffusus  atque  odio  implacabili, 
ac  tandem  non  bonis,  ut  Belgae  norunt,  artibus  ad  Iprensem  episcopatum  promotus, 
grande  volumen  viginti  duobus  annis  parturivit,  quo  sub  Augustini  Hipponensis  episcopi 
sanctissimi  speciosa  larva  auxiliares  Calvino  Lutheroque  copias  adversus  Romanam 
Ecclesiam  comparare  ac  submittere  non  erubuit  .  .  ."  ([a2]v). 

26.  Etymologies,  pp.  135-37. 

27.  Ibid.,  p.  137. 

28.  Autant  Labbe  a  raison  en  faisant  venir  cher  de  cams  (voir  GLLF),  autant  il  se 
trompe  en  confondant  cher  et  chere  dans  I'expression  "faire  bonne  chere,"  qui  signifie 
"faire  bon  visage,"  du  grec  xapa. 

29.  "Radical  expressif  tchitch,  evoquant  la  petitesse"  {GLLF)  avec  une  reference  a 
Chretien  de  Troyes  (v.  1175).  L'expression  "etre  chiche  de"  se  trouve  chez  Rob.  Es- 
tienne  (1538). 

30.  De  Tallemand  iSMtVA;,  adresse,  talent,  deschicken,  preparer,  arranger  (GLLi^.  Done 
apparemment  aucun  rapport  etymologique  entre  chiche  et  chic. 

31.  "Alteration  de  I'ancien  fr.  cice,  du  latin  cicer,  pois  chiche"  {GLLF),  v.  1244. 

32.  Op.  cit.,  p.  139. 

33.  "Suae  rei  tenax,  vox  dubiae  originis  nisi  forte  pendeat  a  cicere  genere  leguminis 
quia  viri  tenaces  parcentes  crumenae  leguminibus  vivunt"  (Bovelles,  De  origine  diet.  Gall. , 
ed.  Demaiziere,  p.  87). 

34.  GLLF  s'accorde  avec  Labbe  quand  il  remarque  dans  chicaner  un  suffixe  ajoute 
au  radical  chic,  "terme  de  valeur  expressive,  designant  quelque  chose  de  petit":  v.  1460, 
Villon.  Pascal  a  contribue  a  repandre  ce  verbe  au  sens  de:  soulever  une  contestation 
sur  des  vetilles,  dans  ses  Provinciales  de  1657. 

35.  Op.  cit.,  p.  140. 

36.  Ibid.,  p.  140. 

37.  Lat.  pop.  acrus,  du  lat.  clas.  acer-acris  (pointu),  d'apres  GLLF  {v.  1120). 

38.  Op.  cit.,  p.  19. 

39.  Origine  inconnue,  se  contente  de  dire  avec  prudence  GLLF,  sans  faire  la  moin- 
dre  allusion  a  quelque  hypothese  que  ce  soit. 

40.  II  s'agit  de  VOnomasticon,  variarum  rerum  propria  nomina  .  .  .  (Dordrecht:  J.  Berew- 
out,  1618). 

41.  Le  grammairien  Jacques  Du  Bois  ou  Sylvius,  d'origine  picarde.  Voir  G.  Huth, 
"Jacques  Dubois,  Verfasser  der  ersten  latein-franzosischen  Grammatik  (1531),"  in:  Pro- 
gramm  des  Konigl.  Marienstifts- Gymnasiums  zu  Stettin  (Stettin,  1899)  pp.  3-24. 

42.  Op.  cit.,  p.  372. 

43.  Sans  le  moindre  doute  (voir  GLLF). 

44.  Op.  cit.,  pp.  380-81. 

45.  Op.  cit.,  p.  363. 

46.  Voir  n.  1. 


JEAN-CLAUDE  MARGOLIN  465 


47.  De  origine  dictionum  Gallicanarum,  p.  77  (dans  le  Liber  de  differentia  vulgarium  lin- 
guarum,  Paris,  Rob.  Estienne,  1533). -"De  I'anc.  fr.  gogue,  rejouissance,  liesse  (12^  siecle, 
Isopet  I),  radiccil  onomatopeique  gog,  a  rapprocher  de  gag  et  de  kok  qui  evoquent  la 
joie,  un  evenement  plaisant"  (GLLF).  Vers  1462,  dans  les  Cent  nouvelles  nouvelles,  "faire 
goguette  de"  signifie  "se  regaler  de." 

48.  Alors  que  Labbe  dit  que  "gober  a  ete  tire  du  son,"  GLLF  fait  venir  ce  mot  d'un 
radical  gaulois  gobbo,  bee,  bouche.  Employe  par  R.  Estienne  (1549)  au  sens  propre  ou 
physique  (avaler  rapidement  en  aspirant  et  sans  macher),  et  par  Retz  (1650)  au  sens 
derive  (accepter  naivement  n'importe  quoi). 

49.  Op.  cit.,  p.  263. 

50.  GLLF:  cloche,  rapporte  egalement  au  bas-latin  clocca,  mot  apporte  par  les  moines 
irlandais.  Aucun  rapport  avec  cochlea. 

51.  Cf.  De  origine  .  .  .  ed.  C.  Demaiziere,  p.  55,  et  p.  134.  Le  texte  cite  provient 
du  De  vitiis  vulg.  ling.,  p.  14  (et  p.  88). 

52.  GLLF:  irriter-irritare  (1356,  Bersuire;  1536,  C.  Chrestien). 

53.  Labbe,  op.  cit.,  p.  302. 

54.  Op.  cit.,  p.  285. 

55.  Mais  lui-meme  commet  la  bevue  de  confondre  heure  et  heur,  ou  de  faire  deriver 
celui-ci  de  celui-la,  alors  que  le  second  mot  vient  de  ugurium  (lat.  pop.),  derive  lui- 
meme  de  augurium. 

56.  Ce  n'est  apparemment  pas  le  cas  de  GLLF,  qui  propose  comme  (seule)  ety- 
mologie:  rever,  de  r[e]-et  du  v.  non  atteste  esver,  vagabonder,  derive  du  gallo-roman 
esvo,  vagabond;  lat.  pop.  exvagus,  meme  sens  que  le  lat.  clas.  vagus,  qui  erre  {ex  etant 
un  prefixe  a  valeur  intensive). 

57.  Op.  cit.,  p.  418. 

58.  Ne  peut-on  pas  rapprocher  ce  dever  de  V esver  de  GLLF? 

59.  Ed.  G.  Cohen  (Paris:  Ch.  Bosse,  1931),  fol.  XLLb  (fac-simile  de  I'edition  ori- 
ginale  de  1529). 

60.  Op.  cit.,  p.  331 .  Voir  GLLF,  qui  rapproche  marmaille  de  marmot,  et  fait  de  marmot 
un  mot  d'origine  onomatopeique  (mouvements  continuels  des  babines  de  certains  singes 
(anc.  fr.  marmote,  guenon,  v.  1 180)  donnant  I'impression  qu'ils  marmottent).  Labbe  pense 
que  marmaille,  ou  d'autres  mots,  comme  marmots,  marmousis,  marmelade  ou  marou- 
fle,  sont  "faits  a  plaisir."  Mais  il  se  moque  surtout  de  ceux  qui  font  venir  marmaille  du  grec. 

61.  II  s'agit  en  fait  d'un  complement  a  son  ouvrage. 

62.  Voir  n.  68. 

63.  Etymologies,  p.  119. 

64.  Seconde  pzirtie,  p.  14. 

65.  Ibid.,  p.  5. 

66.  Les  veritables  Antiquitez  d'Abbeville,  opposees  a  lafausse  Bretagne  .  .  .  (Sommervogel, 
n°  13).  II  cite  Strabon  pour  etayer  ses  arguments  contre  le  "Sieur  Danson." 

67.  Ses  adversaires  I'accuseront  meme  de  plagiat. 

68.  \J allusion  est  une  figure  de  rhetorique  qui  consiste  en  un  mot,  une  expression, 
une  phrase,  qui  eveillent  I'idee  d'une  personne  ou  d'une  chose  sans  les  nommer  ex- 
pressement. 

69.  Dans  son  Port-Royal  (1.  v.,  p.  50),  Sainte-Beuve  n'exprime  pas  de  jugement  plus 
favorable  malgre  ses  excellentes  dispositions  a  I'egard  des  Jansenistes. 

70.  Jardin,  ed.  de  1657,  p.  106. 

71.  Ibid.,  p.  111. 

72.  Op.  cit.,  e4v-e5r. 

73.  Elle  date  de  1644  (Paris:  Vitre).  Mes  citations  sont  faites  d'apr^s  r6dition  de 


466  BATAILLE   DES  "lATINISEURS"  ET  "hELLENISEURS" 

1655  (Paris:  P.  Le  Petit,  exempl.  X7574  de  la  Bibliotheque  Nationale). 

74.  Ibid.,  pp.  131-32. 

75.  Ibid.,  p.  357. 

76.  En  fait  il  ne  s'agit  que  de  quelques  pziragraphes  ou  de  quelques  pages  dans  un 
volume  enorme  de  1500  folios. 

77.  Comme  Goropins,  dans  ses  Origines  Antverpienses. 

78.  Voir  Nouvelle  Biog.  gener. ,  t.  39,  col.  293-94,  et  Biog.  nat.  beige,  t.8,  col.  119-23. 

79.  Avertissement  aux  Lecteurs  [g3]v-[g4]r. 

80.  Exemplaire  de  la  Bibl.  nationzde. 

81.  Avertissement  [g4]r. 

82.  Op.  cit.,  pp.  18-19. 

83.  Nous  nous  appuyons,  pour  controler  les  etymologies  de  Pasor,  essentiellement 
sur  le  Greek- English  Lexicon  de  ces  auteurs  (Oxford,  Clarendon,  1977,  nouv.  ed.),  et  sur 
H.  Frisk,  Griechisches  Etymologisches  Worterhuch  (Heidelberg:  C.  Winter,  1960). 

84.  Etymologies,  p.  192. 

85.  Que  Ton  pourrait  traduire  par:  "Bravo!  bravissimo!  excellent!" 

86.  Etymologies,  pp.  388-89. 

87.  Ibid.,  pp.  425-29.  Voir  Etyma  .  .  .,  p.  61.  Pasor  avait  ecrit:  ''Salamin,  vel  Salamis, 
insula  Cypri  in  mari  Euboica  .  .  . ,"  faisant  reference  a  un  passage  des  Actes  des  Apotres 
(13,5).  Labbe  s'en  prenait  a  "ces  petits  grammairiens  qui  n'ont  jamais  rien  leu  que  leurs 
grammaires,  et  veulent  pedantizer  partout."  Lancelot  avait  propose  comme  etymologic 
possible  de  Salamine,  soit  d(xi?  xoO  SdcXou,  c'est-a-dire  matula  Sali  (dejections  de  la  mer), 
soit  [JiivGr]  ToG  SaXou,  c'est-a-dire  sordes  maris  (les  depots  ou  les  alluvions  de  la  mer). 

88.  Voir  Nouv.  Biogr.  gener.,  t.4,  col.  614-15,  et  Neue  Deutsche  Biographie,  I,  p.  605. 
Voir  aussi  J.  Hoffmeister,  "K.v.B.  als  dt.  Poet,"  in  Ztsch.f.dt.Philol.  54  (1929)  p.  395-400. 

89.  Ou  Commentaria  adversaria,  Francfort,  1624  (ex.  Bibl.  Nat.  Z.  438).  L'adjectif  sub- 
stantive adversaria  est  employe  notamment  par  les  philologues  du  XVP  et  du  XVIP 
siecle  dans  le  sens  de  "commentaires"  (auquel  cas  nous  aurions  ici  une  sorte  de  redou- 
blement  semantique,  voir  de  pleonasme).  C'est  le  terme  dont  se  sert  Turnebe  dans 
ses  propres  commentaires  philologiques:  Adriani  Turnebi  Regii  philosophiae  Graecae  profes- 
soris  Adversaria,  2  tomes  et  24  livres,  Paris.  II  semble  que  le  terme  (d'apres  son  emploi 
ancien:  voir  notamment  Cic.  Q..  Rose.  5)  signifie  plus  precisement:  des  commentaires 
ou  des  annotations  faites  au  jour  le  jour,  sans  un  plan  parfaitement  rigoureux  et  deter- 
mine a  I'avance.  Mais  dans  le  De  oratore  (35,22),  il  s'agit  bien  d'arguments  opposes 
par  un  adversaire. 

90.  Voir  p.  2  et  p.  5. 

91.  Voir  le  texte  complet  de  Barth  (lib.  XIII,  cap.  4,  col.  717). 

92.  Etymologies,  13 v. 

93.  Adversaria,  col.  717  (XIII,  c.  4). 

94.  Voir  nos  deux  articles  cites  a  la  note  1. 

95.  Dans  ses  ouvrages  ecrits  en  latin  et  surtout  en  allemand  sur  la  langue  allemande. 
Voir  Justus  Georg  Schottelius  1612-1676.  Ein  Teutscher  Gelehrter  am  Wolfenbiitteler  Hof,  Aus- 
stellungskataloge  der  Herzog  August  Bibliothek,  n°  18,  1976. 

96.  Voir  notamment  sa  Dissertatio  de  variis  Unguis,  et  plusieurs  considerations  sur  I'ety- 
mologie  dans  ses  Opera  philologica. 

97.  Etymologies,  p.  73. 

98.  Ibid.,  p.  182. 

99.  Ibid.,  pp.  274-75. 

100.  Ibid.,  p.  481. 

101.  Adversaria,  lib.  XIII,  cap.  4,  col.  717. 


JEAN-CLAUDE  MARGOLIN  ^gy 

102.  Janua  linguarum  reserata  (la  preface  est  datee  du  4  mars  1631). 

103.  Cadmus  Graecophoenix,  id  est  Etymologicum,  Breme,  1625. 

104.  Preface,  e4r. 

105.  Ibid.,  e4r.  II  s'agit  des  Tableaux  methodiques  de  la  Geographie  Royale  presentez  au 
Roy  Tres-Chrestien  Louis  XIV .  .  .,  (Paris:  M.  et  J.  Henault,  1646).  Voir  Sommervogel, 
op.  cit.,  n°  13.  L'ouvrage  en  question  est  le  Pharus  Galliae  antiquae.  Nous  n'insisterons 
pas  sur  ce  passage  de  la  preface  dujardin  de  1664  par  respect  pour  les  auteurs  de  la 
Grammaire  de  Port-Royal.  II  est  plus  difficile  de  se  forger  aujourd'hui  un  jugement  per- 
sonnel sur  I'oeuvre  du  P.  Labbe. 

106.  Deuxieme  partie,  pp.  182-92. 

107.  Etymologies,  pp.  443-44. 

108.  Ibid.,  p.  17. 

109.  Voir  le  texte  dans  I'edition  des  Opera  omnia  d'Amsterdam  {ASD  IV-1,  1974), 
pp.  260-770. 

110.  Art.  Siffler,  p.  444. 

111.  Etymologies,  p.  18:  "Je  rapporte  a  cela  la  gentille  rencontre  du  petit  gargon  qui 
disoit  a  son  pere  qui  estoit  filetoupier  ou  batteur  de  chanvre  de  son  mestier:  battez 
mon  pere,  et  je  feray  ahan  pour  vous,  pensant  soulager  son  pere  d'une  partie  de  son 
travail."  N'est-ce  pas  la  preuve  que  I'enfant  attachait  a  ce  mot  une  valeur  intention- 
nelle?  C'est,  dirion-nous,  parce  que  ce  mot  etait  de  I'ordre  de  la  culture  et  non  de  la 
nature.  Labbe  ne  serait-il  pas  pris  a  son  prop  re  piege? 

112.  Ibid.,  p.  373  (et  p.  326  pour  maman). 

113.  Ibid.,  p.  150. 

114.  Ibid.,  p.  74. 

115.  L'allusion  a  Vossius  est  "tactique",  car  Labbe  s'inclinait,  comme  les  maitres 
de  Port-Royal,  devant  I'auteur  de  YEtymologicon  linguae  Latinae  (1662).  Meme  quand  il 
n'est  pas  d'accord  avec  lui,  il  se  contente  d'ecrire:  "Nous  considererons  ce  qu'en  auront 
dit  Vossius  et  les  autres  Etymologistes  latins,  puis  nous  choisirons  ce  qui  nous  semblera 
le  plus  probable"  (p.  406).  Voir  encore  I'article  titre  des  Etymologies  (p.  469).  Malgre 
sa  violente  opposition  a  I'etymologie  proposee  par  Vossius,  il  se  garde  de  prononcer 
son  nom. 

116.  Epistre  a  I'Academie,  a4v. 

117.  Car  on  a  vu  qu'Estienne  lui-meme  avait  commis  bien  des  erreurs, 

118.  Voir  Etymologies,  p.  422. 

119.  Par  dela  cette  querelle  apparemment  subalterne,  se  profilent  des  motivations 
non  exprimees,  voire  deux  attitudes  philosophiques  divergentes:  Labbe  et  les  Jesuites 
"latiniseurs"  ou  "romanistes"  sont  sensibles  a  la  cause  seconde,  voyant  dans  le  latin  la 
langue  qui  a  en  grande  partie  engendre  le  frangais  (continuite  historique  et  linguis- 
tique).  Les  grammairiens  de  Port-Royal  sont  des  philosophes  cartesiens,  sensibles  a 
la  cause  premiere  ou  a  la  source:  I'histoire  les  interesse  moins  que  les  questions  fon- 
damentales  et  philosophiques  de  structure  (du  langage  et  de  la  pensee).  Cette  question 
a  fait  I'objet  d'une  discussion  avec  M.  Alain  Michel. 

120.  Voir  notre  article  "Alberto  Pio  et  les  ciceroniens  italiens,"  dans  Societa,  politica 
e  cultura  ai  tempi  di  Alberto  Pio,  Padoue,  Ed.  Antenore,  1981,  t.  I,  pp.  225-59. 

121 .  En  particulier  dans  La  naissance  de  I'humanisme  moderne  (Paris:  Beauchesne,  1940). 

122.  Voir  Georges  Rioux,  L'oeuvre pedagogique  de  Wolfgang  Ratichius  (Paris:  Vrin,  1963). 

123.  La  bibliographic  du  pedagogue  tcheque  est  tr^s  riche:  voir  notamment  M. 
Denis,  th^se  (inedite)  sur  Comenius  (Univ.  de  Tours). 


Thomas  More  on  the  Double  Portrait 

of  Erasmus  and  Pierre  GiUis: 

Humanist  Rhetoric  or  Renaissance  Art  Theory? 

Lise  Bek 

The  following  pages  will  be  dedicated,  in  a  certain  sense,  to  the  double 
portrait  that  the  two  Flemish  humanists,  Erasmus  of  Rotterdam  and 
Pierre  Gillis,  had  the  Antwerp  master,  Quintin  Metsys,  paint  of  them 
in  order  to  present  it  to  their  common  friend  and  fellow  humanist,  Thomas 
More.  The  panel,  however,  is  merely  the  object,  so  to  speak,  of  the  paper, 
its  subject  being  the  considerations  on  it  as  well  as  on  the  art  of  painting  in 
general  made  by  More  in  the  two  letters  written,  presumably,  on  October  the 
7th,  1517,  to  thank  each  of  the  friends  for  the  reception  of  their  present.^ 

Alois  Gerlo,  in  his  booklet  on  the  portraiture  of  Erasmus  from  1969,  prai- 
ses the  letter  to  Gillis  for  its  elegance  of  style  and  affectionate  tone.  The  letter 
to  Erasmus,  however,  the  one  written  first,  he  finds  pompous  and  florid.  I 
would  award  the  prize,  nonetheless,  to  this  latter  letter,  the  content  of  which 
is,  as  I  hope  to  show,  by  far  the  more  substantial  and  the  more  personal  from 
an  art  historian's  point  of  view.^ 

But  before  we  turn  to  the  letters,  let  us  have  a  glance  at  the  picture  that 
occasioned  them  in  order  to  outline  its  pictorial  idea  2ind  source  of  inspiration. 


I 

The  picture,  idea,  and  source  of  inspiration 

For  the  discussion  of  the  authenticity  and  whereabouts  of  the  double  por- 
trait, known  in  two  versions,  each  of  them  divided  now  into  single  portraits 
and  located  separately,  I  refer  to  the  thorough  investigations  of  the  paintings 
made  in  connection  with  the  More  exhibition  at  the  National  Portrait  Gallery 
in  London  1978.'^ 

Through  the  abrupt  cutting  of  figures,  table,  and  the  stored  book-shelves 
narrowly  closing  the  background,  the  artist  has  invited  the  beholder  into  the 


470  "  THOMAS   MORE  ON  THE   DOUBLE  PORTRAIT 

Study  of  his  two  sitters,  bringing  him  on  terms  of  conspatiahty  with  them,  so 
to  speak.  Such  open-form  compositions  are  typical  in  sixteenth-century  man- 
nerism.^ By  means  of  gestures,  facial  expressions,  and  the  non-fixation  of  the 
directions  of  the  looks,  Metsys  has,  at  the  same  time,  brought  about  a  sit- 
uation of  suspension  midway  between  the  momentaneous  action  and  static  rep- 
resentation. Distracted,  one  from  writing,  the  other  from  reading  their  names, 
the  two  persons  are  but  half  aware  of  one  another  and  of  the  beholder. 

Metsys's  main  source  of  inspiration  was  the  work  of  Jan  van  Eyck,  the  artist 
of  the  Netherlands  most  celebrated  by  the  Italian  humanists  of  the  fifteenth 
century  for  his  truth  to  nature  in  the  illusionistic  rendering  of  the  surface  tex- 
ture in  every  detail.^  His  was  the  first  double  portrait  to  depict  a  situation, 
the  wedding  of  the  Arnolfini  couple,  1434.  But  because  of  the  frontality  of  the 
full-length  figures  and  the  solemn  gesture  of  the  groom,  it  tends  to  become 
more  static  than  momentaneous.  Similarly,  the  composition  is  well  closed  within 
its  frame,  the  spatial  depth  of  the  picture  being  further  accentuated  through 
the  contracted  image  of  the  room  reflected  in  the  convex  mirror  on  its  back 
wall.  In  addition,  the  beholder  is  effectively  excluded  from  this  room,  the  mir- 
ror showing  only  the  painter  and  his  companion  entering  through  its  door, 
as  testified  by  the  signature  "Johannes  de  Eyck  fuit  hie."  Or  else  we  are  to  look 
at  the  picture  in  the  guise  of  the  painter,  a  joke,  certainly,  worthy  of  any  hu- 
manist.^ 

Jan  van  Eyck,  moreover,  made  the  representation  of  the  humanists'  favour- 
ite saint,  the  learned  church  father  Jerome,  in  his  study,  the  pictorial  motif 
most  favoured  by  them.  In  the  version  of  1441  he  has,  in  the  letter  on  the  saint's 
desk  addressed  to  the  Cardinal  of  S.  Pietro  in  Vincoli  in  Rome,  made  a  com- 
pliment, probably  to  the  commissionary  of  the  panel,  as  shown  by  Erwin  Pa- 
nofsky,  since  it  was  the  titular  church,  not  of  the  saint,  but  of  one  of  the  painter's 
Italian  customers,  the  equally  learned  Nicolo  Albergati.^ 

But  it  was  for  Metsys  to  take  the  full  step  using  the  motif  coined  by  his  pre- 
decessor as  the  lay-out  for  his  Erasmus  portrait,  handing  over  the  letter,  writ- 
ten as  it  were  in  More's  hand,  to  Gillis.  And  More,  as  he  tells  us  in  his  letters 
to  his  friends,  fully  appreciated  the  double  portrait  both  for  the  air  of  im- 
mediate presence  it  induced  upon  him  and  for  its  sophisticated  puns  of  script. 


II 

The  letters 


In  the  letters.  More  mostly  devotes  himself  to  an  exaltation  of  the  mutual 
friendship  of  the  three  men,  of  which  the  portraits  are  testimony  for  him.  And, 
furthermore,  they  have  in  his  view  been  able  to  bring  the  absent  friends  close. 


LISE  BEK  471 

recalling  them  constantiy  to  his  memory,  not  only  in  spirit  but  corporeally. 
It  was  exactly  this  capacity  of  the  portrait  that  served  as  an  argument  used 
by  the  leading  figure  among  the  art  theoricians  of  the  previous  century,  the 
all-embracing  Florentine  Leon  Battista  Alberti,  in  the  apology  for  the  art  of 
painting  beginning  the  second  book  of  his  De  Ptctura,  written  in  the  1430s.^ 
Thence,  it  became  a  common  topos  in  the  literature  on  art.^^ 

But  there  are  also  to  be  found,  in  each  of  the  letters,  some  remarks  on  the 
pictures  of  a  more  specific  kind.  The  question  is  now,  how  far  do  they  reflect 
More's  view  on  art  and,  if  so,  what  was  his  frame  of  reference  for  verbalizing  it? 

In  one  of  the  two  Latin  verses  accompanying  the  letter  to  Gillis,  More  gives 
a  description  of  the  panel,  in  which  the  qualities  pointed  out  are  the  truth  to 
nature  of  the  portraits  in  their  lifelikeness  and  recognizability  and  the  cunning 
use  of  hand-writing  and  book  titles  to  further  identify  the  persons.  Addressing 
his  words  directly  to  the  beholder,  he  exclaims: 

Tu  quos  aspicis,  agnitos  opinor 
Ex  vultu  tibi,  si  prius  vel  vnquam 
Visos;  sin  minus,  indicabit  altrum 
Ipsi  littera  scripta:  nomen  alter, 
Ne  sis  nescius,  ecce  scribit  ipse.^^ 

Then  follows  a  praise  of  the  painter  in  the  general  humanistic  manner,  en- 
titling him  an  innovator  of  ancient  art  and  comparing  him  to  Apelles.  It  is 
said  here,  too,  that  through  his  handling  of  the  colours  he  manages  to  instill 
an  illusion  of  life  into  the  dead  representation: 

Mire  composito  potens  colore 
Vitam  adfingere  mortuis  figuris.^^ 

In  the  postscript,  finally,  on  the  exact  rendering  of  his  own  hand  in  the  let- 
ter held  by  Gillis,  More  exhausts  himself  in  admiration  for  Metsys's  imitative 
skill  tending  almost  to  veritable  falsification. 

Without  going  into  further  detail  it  should  be  stated  that  in  his  insistence 
on  the  value  of  painting  as  lying  in  its  meticulous  imitation  of  nature  and  its 
skillful  rendering  of  the  minutest  detail.  More  joins  a  solid  humanist  tradition 
of  picture  description,  reaching  back  to  the  ekphrasis  genre  of  ancient  rhetoric 
and  revived  by  Dante  in  his  passage  on  the  marble  reliefs  in  Song  10  of  the 
Purgatory  as  well  as  by  Petrzirch  in  his  sonnets  on  Simone  Martini's  portrait 
of  Laura.  ^^ 

An  obvious  example  in  our  case  should  be  mentioned  — without  postulat- 
ing, however,  a  direct  linkage  between  the  two  texts  — the  De  Pictoribus  written 
in  1456  by  Bartolommeo  Fazio.  Fazio  is,  here,  as  evidenced  by  Michael  Bax- 
andall,  leaning  heavily  on  Philostratos  the  Younger.'*  In  his  life  of  Jan  van 
Eyck,  the  author  describes  an  altar  piece  now  lost,  but  containing  a  Saint  Je- 
rome in  his  Study  as  well  as  a  pair  of  donors'  portraits.  In  these  lines,  the  ren- 


472 


THOMAS   MORE  ON   THE   DOUBLE   PORTRAIT 


Figs.  1-2.  The  two  portraits  of  Erasmus  and  Pierre  Gillis  painted  by 

Quintin  Metsys  as  a  double  portrait:  one  showing  the  replica 

in  the  Barberini  Collection  in  Rome  once  regarded  as  the  original; 

the  other  being  the  original  now  at  Longford  Castle,  England. 


USE   BEK 


473 


474 


THOMAS   MORE  ON   THE   DOUBLE   PORTRAIT 


Fig.  3.  The  Arnolfini  Double  Portrait  executed  in  1434 
by  Jan  van  Eyck:  The  National  Gallery  in  London. 


LISE   BEK 


475 


Fig.  4.  Saint  Jerome  in  his  Study,  unfinished  by  the  death  of  Jan  van  Eyck  1441 
and  completed  in  1442  by  Petrus  Christus:  Institute  of  Art  in  Detroit. 


476  THOMAS   MORE  ON  THE  DOUBLE  PORTRAIT 

dering's  happy  concurrence  with  real  life  and  nature  is  repeatedly  stressed  in 
that  the  figures  seem  alive  but  for  their  lack  of  voice:  the  books  rise  from  the 
plane  surface,  their  titles  standing  out  clearly,  and  the  sunbeam  sparkles  like 
the  sun  itself. 

In  his  letter  to  Erasmus,  More  has  but  a  few  lines  on  the  picture  as  such, 
eloquent,  however,  in  all  their  awkwardness.  Expressing  his  joy  for  having  re- 
ceived, at  last,  the  double  portrait  so  impatiently  waited  for,  he  continues: 

Nam  quis  vel  explicet  verbis  vel  cogitatione  non  sentiat,  quorum  hom- 
inum  vel  creta  modo  vel  carbone  vultus  adumbrati  capere  etiam  quem- 
libet  poterant  qui  non  ad  omnem  litterarum  virtutisque  sensum  prorsus 
obstupuerat,  me  vero  singulariter  etiam  permouere  talium  amicorum 
qualitercunque  representata  memoria,  eorum  nunc  mirifice  rapi  me  tanto 
artificio  deliniatis  atque  expressis  imaginibus  vt  quae  veteres  facile  pic- 
tores  omnes  prouocauerint?  quas  quisquis  intuetur,  is  nimirum  fusiles 
eas  potius  aut  sculptiles  arbitretur  quam  pictas:  ita  porro  eminere  atque 
extare  videntur  iusta  virilis  corporis  crassicie.^^ 

It  means  in  a  somewhat  simplified  paraphrase  that  to  everybody,  even  to 
those  having  acquired  some  sensibility  of  art  and  virtue,  the  heads  of  these 
men  lighted  as  in  chalk  and  shadowed  in  coal  will  appeal  for  their  artistry  as 
images  perfect  in  drawing  and  relief.  It  is  no  wonder,  then,  that  he.  More, 
is  ravished  by  them,  since  they  recall  to  his  memory  his  dear  friends.  In  fact, 
one  would  imagine  them  to  be  fused  or  sculpted  rather  than  painted,  so  clearly 
do  they  stand  out  and  protrude  showing  the  manly  body  in  its  full  volume. 

Here  we  are  no  longer  in  the  backwaters  of  humanist  rhetoric,  but  at  the 
main  spring  of  Renaissance  art  theory.  For  More  has  chosen  to  express  him- 
self by  paraphrasing  a  passage  from  the  De  Pictura,  and  a  very  crucial  one,  in- 
deed. Alberti  is  here  summing  up  his  rules  on  the  last  of  the  three  parts  in 
which,  in  his  second  book,  he  divides  painting,  that  of  colouring.  He  does  so 
by  telling  the  painter  that  the  most  important  thing  to  know  is  how  to  use  white 
and  black  to  make  light  and  shadow  in  order  to  obtain  an  effect  of  relief  on 
the  plane  surface.*^ 

In  my  opinion.  More,  in  his  "vel  creta  modo  vel  carbone  vultus  adumbrati" 
refers  to  this  passage  and  not  to  the  respective  drawing  techniques,  which  would 
be  slightly  out  of  place  in  talking  about  painting.^'' 

Alberti  further  states: 

Pictos  ego  vultus,  et  doctis  et  indoctis  consentientibus,  laudabo  eos  qui 
veluti  exsculpti  extare  a  tabulis  videantur,  eosque  contra  vituperabo  qui- 
bus  nihil  artis  nisi  fortassis  in  lineamentis  eluceat.^^ 

He  believes  that  both  the  learned  and  unlearned  will  agree  with  him  that  the 
painted  figure  should  stand  out  as  if  sculptured,  whereas  those  in  which  no 
art  but  that  of  drawing  can  be  glimpsed  must  be  rejected.  This  phrase  is  widely 


USE  BEK  477 

drawn  on  by  More.  It  makes  up,  in  fact,  the  basic  structure  of  his  first  long 
sentence,  and  its  allusion  to  sculpture  is  ornamentally  enriched  to  form  his  last 
sentence. 

Alberti's  remarks  on  the  pictures  he  dislikes  are  taken  by  More  to  credit  Met- 
sys's  work  with  both  drawing  and  relief,  and  correctly  so,  since  Alberti's  con- 
tinuation runs: 

Bene  conscriptam,  optime  coloratam  compositionem  esse  velim.^^ 

Here  it  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  colouring  in  Alberti's  vocabulary  means 
reception  of  light  or  the  making  of  relief.  By  the  way,  I  interpret  the  term  "ex- 
pressis  imaginibus"  in  analogy  to  that  of  "expressis  verbis,"  and  not  referring 
to  expression  in  the  psychological  sense,  which  would  imply  the  use  of  the  form 
"exprimentibus"  common  in  other  art  literary  texts. ^^  The  "composito  colore" 
through  which,  in  the  Gillis  letter,  Metsys  is  said  to  bring  to  life  dead  draw- 
ing, may  be  understood  in  the  same,  Albertian,  way. 

To  me,  then,  there  is  no  doubt  that  More  was  closely  acquainted  with  Al- 
berti's theory  on  painting.  Thus  he  was  able  not  only  to  grasp  one  of  the  most 
important  moments  of  his  text  but  also  to  use  it  freely  to  present  his  own  views. 
The  true  pictorial  qualities  of  the  double  portrait  are  subjected,  consequently, 
to  analysis  in  terms  of  the  plastic-spatial  values  claimed  by  Alberti  to  be  the 
means  of  recreating  visual  reality  in  painting. 

In  the  Gillis  letter,  on  the  contrary,  the  representation  lends  its  picturesque 
appearance  to  rhetoric  being,  as  it  were,  a  mere  pretext  for  its  exercise  in  the 
ekphrasis  description. 

In  conclusion  one  may  ask  why  More  should  change  his  views  on  the  same 
work  of  art  so  radically  — on  one  and  the  same  day.  A  plausible  answer  might 
be  that  far  from  changing  his  mind,  he  merely  varied  his  style  of  writing  in 
the  two  letters,  a  possibility  which  fmds  support  in  the  reoccurrence  of  certain 
details  in  both.  We  may  now  ask  what  his  purpose  was  for  doing  so.  Probably, 
he  was  consciously  tuning  the  two  letters  to  suit  the  diverse  personalities  of 
his  two  friends.  He  would  be,  thereby,  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  Eras- 
mian  ideas  of  letter  writing. 

Gillis,  then,  would  be  but  an  average  humanist,  well  versed  in  his  classics 
and  therefore  capable  of  duly  appreciating  a  good  piece  of  rhetoric  in  all  its 
verbal  and  mental  equilibrism.  Erasmus,  on  the  other  hand,  was  estimated 
by  his  admiring  friend  to  be  sufficiently  superior  to  follow  him  in  his  primary 
steps,  stumbling  though  they  were,  into  the  virgin  fields  of  art  criticism.  And 
More  was  right,  I  suppose. ^^ 

The  fact  that  precisely  in  the  passage  mentioned,  Alberti  displays  his  classic 
eruditon  alluding  to  Cicero's  discussion  of  memory,  would,  if  it  had  come  to 
their  minds,  doubtlessly  have  increased  the  charm  of  the  Albertian  text  to  both 
the  writer  and  the  reader  of  the  Erasmus-letter.  Actually,  Alberti's  insistence 
on  the  effect  of  relief  in  the  painted  figure  is  an  assimilation  of  the  Roman 


478  *  THOMAS   MORE  ON  THE   DOUBLE  PORTRAIT 

author's  words  on  the  clarity  with  which  images  of  the  memory  present  them- 
selves to  the  mind.^^ 

As  for  the  two  Flemish  humanists,  at  any  rate,  it  must  be  admitted  that  they 
succeeded  in  fmding  in  their  fellow  countryman  a  painter  who  was  able  to  re- 
spond to  their  humanistic  demands.  By  re-using  the  style  of  antecedent,  he 
reactualized  the  taste  par  excellence  of  their  Italian  predecessors. 

In  a  way,  More,  for  his  part,  found  in  the  same  tradition  the  tone  with  which 
to  tint  the  elocutio  of  his  praise  of  the  double  portrait.  But  when  it  came  to  his 
personal  experience  of  the  picture,  he  turned  to  Italian  Renaissance  art  theory 
for  a  practicail  instrument  to  handle  his  observations  as  well  as  for  a  literary 
model  on  which  to  base  the  formulation  of  his  judgment  upon  it  as  a  work  of  art. 

In  this  part  as  an  art  critic.  More  is,  in  my  opinion,  precocious  for  his  time, 
forecasting,  thus,  the  rise  of  scholarly  art  criticism  in  the  eighteenth  century 
with  a  Diderot,  a  Winckelmann,  and  a  Lessing. 

Aarhus  Universitet 


Notes 


1.  The  letters  are  edited  in  the  Allen  edition  of  the  Erasmian  correspondence,  P. 
S.  Allen,  H.  M.  Allen,  and  H.  W.  Garrod,  Erasmus  Roterodamus.  La  correspondance  d'E- 
rasme,  12  vols.  (Bruxelles:  Presses  Academiques  Europeennes,  1967-84),  and  included, 
too,  in  the  series  of  letters  by  Erasmus  and  his  circle  relating  to  the  portraiture  of  the 
great  Flemish  humanist  given  in  French  translation  by  Alois  Gerlo,  Erasme  et  ses  por- 
traitistes  (Nieuwkoop:  B.  de  Graaf,  1969),  pp.  12-16. 

2.  Gerlo,  pp.  12-13. 

3.  The  letter  to  Erasmus  has  not,  to  my  knowledge,  been  previously  taken  into  con- 
sideration as  a  text  of  interest  for  art  history. 

4.  The  results  are  published  by  Lome  Campbell,  Margaret  Mann  Phillips,  Huber- 
tus  Schulte  Herbriiggen,  aind  J.  B.  Trapp  in  "Quentyn  Matsys,  Desiderius  Eramus, 
Pieter  Gillis,  and  Thomas  More,"  The  Burlington  Magazine  120  (1978):  716-24,  and  "A 
Postscript  to  Matsys,"  The  Burlington  Magazine  121  (1979):  435-37.  See  further  the  ex- 
hibition catalogue  The  King's  Good  Servant  Sir  Thomas  More  1477/8-1535,  (London:  The 
National  Portrait  Gallery,  1978)  by  J.  B.  Trapp  and  Hubertus  Schulte  Herbriiggen. 

5.  Doubtlessly,  its  most  notorious  aspect  is  to  be  found  in  the  nonfmito  concept  of 
Italian  cinquecento.  But  even  in  the  art  of  the  Netherlands  it  is  noticeable,  especially 
in  certain  compositorial  principles  such  as  fragmentation. 

6.  For  the  Italian  interest  in  the  Netherlands,  cf.  the  introduction  to  Erwin  Panof- 
sky.  Early  Netherlandish  Painting,  (Cambridge,  Massachusetts:  Harvard  University,  1958), 
vol.  1.  Metsys,  also  in  others  of  his  works,  is  representative  of  the  trend  of  revival  of 
the  tradition  from  the  previous  century  to  be  noted  at  his  time,  not  only  in  the  Neth- 
erlands but  elsewhere. 

7.  For  the  interpretation  of  the  content  of  the  painting  as  expressed  through  the  so- 


USE  BEK  479 

called  "disguised  symbolism,"  cf.  Panofsky,  Early  Netherlandish  Painting,  pp.  140-44.  Ob- 
viously, this  was  an  aspect  of  the  Eyckian  art  which  interested  the  Italian  humanists 
less  than  the  naturalistic  form  used  by  the  painter  to  convey  the  symbolism. 

8.  Panofsky,  pp.  58,  189. 

9.  Leon  Battista  Alberti,  On  Painting  and  On  Sculpture,  ed.  Cecil  Grayson  (London, 
1972),  Lib.  2,  §  25,  p.  61. 

10.  Cf.,  for  instance,  the  dialogue  by  Pier  Candido  Decembrio  published  by  Mi- 
chael Baxandall  in  "A  Dialogue  on  Art  from  the  Court  of  Leonello  d'Este,"  Journal  of 
the  Warburg  and  Courtauld  Institutes,  26  (1963):  304-26,  and  the  passage  on  painting  in 
the  Rimed  Chronicle  on  Federico  da  Montefeltro  edited  by  me  in  "Giovanni  Santi's 
'Disputa  de  la  pictura'  — a  Polemicad  Treatise, "^na/^^rto  Romana  Instituti  Danici,  5  (1969). 

11.  Allen,  vol.  3,  no.  684,  pp.  106  f. 

12.  Ibid. 

13.  Characteristic  in  these  as  well  as  in  other  cases  is  the  reference  to  the  effect  of 
visual  representation  on  other  senses  than  that  of  the  eye,  notably  the  ear  in  the  man- 
ner of  Dante's  "visibile  parlare"  as  well  as  to  an  instantaneousness  and  movement  creat- 
ing the  illusion  of  life. 

14.  Cf.  Michael  Baxandall,  Giotto  and  the  Orators:  Humanist  Observation  of  Painting  in 
Italy  and  the  Discovery  of  Pictorial  Composition,  (London,  1971),  pp.  98  ff.  and  p.  165  giv- 
ing the  Latin  text. 

15.  Allen,  vol.  3,  no.  683,  pp.  103  f. 

16.  Alberti,  Lib.  2,  §  46,  p.  89. 

17.  I  question,  in  other  words,  the  translation  given  by  Gerlo,  Erasme  et  ses  portrait- 
istes,  pp.  12-13. 

18.  Alberti,  Lib.  2,  §  46,  p.  86. 

19.  Ibid. 

20.  In  the  text  mentioned,  Fazio  uses  the  term  "expressa"  to  characterise  one  of  the 
donors'  portraits,  and  in  the  introduction  to  the  De  Pictoribus  he  takes  the  verb  "expri- 
mere"  to  designate  the  painting's  obligation  to  render  both  the  physical  and  the  psy- 
chological character  of  the  figure.  In  both  cases  Baxandall,  Giotto  and  the  Orators,  pp. 
194  ff.,  in  his  translation  of  the  text,  associates  it  with  the  likeness  in  representation. 
Gerlo,  Erasme  et  ses  portraitistes ,  p.  12,  tends  to  the  expressional  interpretation. 

21 .  For  Erasmus'  taste  and  view  on  art,  cf.  Erwin  Panofsky  in  "Erasmus  and  Visual 
Arts,"  Journal  of  the  Warburg  and  Courtauld  Institutes  32  (1969):  200-28. 

22.  Cf.  M.  Tulli  Ciceronis,  Rhetorica.  De  Oratore,  I,  ed.  A.  C.  Wilkins,  (London:  Ox- 
ford University  Press,  1935),  Lib.  2,  pp.  85-87. 


Rhetorik  und  Leserlenkung 
in  der  Aithiopika-Epitome  des  Martin  Crusius 

Gilnter  Berger 

Die  Epitome  des  Tiibinger  Gelehrten  ist  nicht  die  erste,  die  das  Werk 
Heliodors  erfahren  hat:  Schon  700  Jahre  vor  ihm  fertigte  Photios 
ein  Extrakt  der  Aithiopika  fiir  seinen  Bruder  Tarasios  an.  Der  By- 
zantiner  interessierte  sich  kaum  fur  die  Komposition  des  Romans,  liefi  sich 
statt  dessen,  wie  der  Platz  zeigt,  den  er  der  Hexenspuk-Episode  einraumt,  von 
Exotik  und  Phantastik  fesseln,  betonte  aber  andererseits  den  erbaulichen  Cha- 
rakter  der  Liebesabenteuer  der  Protagonisten  und  riihmte  nicht  zuletzt  die 
stiHstischen  Vorziige  HeUodors,  die  er  in  der  Siifie  seiner  Diktion,  seiner  Wort- 
wahl,  Reinheit  der  Sprache  und  in  der  angemessenen  Verwendung  von  Figu- 
ren  zu  erkennen  glaubte.^ 

Trotz  der  Autoritat  des  Photios  und  der  Wertschatzung,  die  HeUodor  auch 
bei  anderen  byzantinischen  Gelehrten  geniefit,^  gelangen  die  Aithiopika  in  der 
Epoche  des  Buchdrucks  erst  relativ  spat  in  die  Hande  der  RepubUk  der  Ge- 
lehrten: 1534  gibt  Vincentius  Opsopoeus  die  ed.  princ.  bei  Hervagen  in  Basel 
heraus.^  In  seiner  Widmungsepistel  an  den  Niirnberger  Rat  streicht  der  Edi- 
tor als  besondere  Qualitaten  des  Werkes  seinen  moralischen  Wert  als  Spiegel 
menschlicher  Leidenschaften  heraus,  die  allerdings  in  der  "constantia"  des  Lie- 
bespaares  Theagenes  und  Charikleia  beispielhaft  gebandigt  erscheinen,  lobt 
in  eher  allgemeinen  Worten  Komposition  und  Stil  als  kunstvoll  und  insistiert 
vor  allem  auf  seinem  Nutzen  in  der  Vermittlung  von  historischem,  geogra- 
phischem,  ethnographischem  und  philosophisch-religiosem  Wissen.  Erv^ahnt 
Opsopoeus  eher  beilaufig  auch  den  Unterhaltungswert  des  Romans,  so  riickt 
Stanislas  Warschewicki  in  der  Vorrede  zu  seiner  lateinischen  Ubersetzung  aus 
dem  Jahre  1551  diesen  Gesichtspunkt  ins  Zentrum  seiner  Uberlegungen,  ohne 
allerdings  die  notwendige  Verkniipfung  mit  dem  moralischen  Nutzwert  zu  ver- 
gessen. 

Vier  Jahre,  bevor  die  Aithiopika  mit  dieser  Ubersetzung  in  die  Sphare  des 
humanistisch  gebildeten,  aber  des  Griechischen  nicht  machtigen  Publikums 
vordringen  konnten,  hattejedoch  Jacques  Amyot  durch  seine  iiberaus  erfolg- 


482  RHETORIK  UND  LESERLENKUNG 

reiche  franzosische  Version  das  Werk  schon  breiteren  Leserschichten  be- 
kanntgemacht.'^  Ihm  ist  hauptsachlich  die  Verbreitung  der  in  der  byzantini- 
schen  Epoche  entstandenen  Legende  zu  verdanken,  Heliodor  habe,  als  Bischof 
von  Trikka  vor  die  Wahl  gestellt,  sich  fiir  sein  Amt  oder  seinen  Roman  zu 
entscheiden,  dem  literarischen  Werk  den  Vorzug  gegeben.^  Insgesamt  spielen 
die  romanpoetologischen  Uberlegungen  Amyots  eine  nicht  zu  unterschatzende 
Rolle  fiir  den  Modellcharakter,  den  die  Aithiopika  bei  der  Herausbildung  von 
Theorie  und  Praxis  des  heroisch-galanten  Romantyps  erlangen  werden.^ 

Nicht  nur  die  Rezeptionsgeschichte  do^r  Aithiopika,  sondern  die  des  griechi- 
schen  Romans  iiberhaupt,  verlauft  somit  in  voUig  anderen  Bahnen,  als  dies 
fiir  die  Rezeption  antiker  Literatur  im  allgemeinen  iiblich  ist.  So  wird  der 
Hirtenroman  des  Longos  schon  1537  von  A.  Caro  ins  Italienische  und  von 
Amyot  1559  ins  Franzosische  iibersetzt,  wohingegen  das  Original  erst  1598 
ediert  wird,  wahrend  die  ed.  princ.  des  Romans  des  Achilles  Tatios,  Leukippe 
und  Kleitophon,  gar  erst  1601  erscheint,  iiber  ein  halbes  Jahrhundert  nach  der 
fragmentarischen  lateinischen  Ubersetzung  des  Annibale  della  Croce  (1544), 
die  Ludovico  Dolce  1546  ins  Italienische  iibertragt.  1551  folgt  die  erste  ita- 
lienische Gesamtiibersetzung  von  Angelo  de  Coccio,  1554  die  erste  franzo- 
sischsprachige  Version  durch  Jacques  Vincent.  Dieses  Phanomen  wird  man 
wohl  nur  mit  der  engen  Bindung  der  griechischen  Romanliteratur  an  vornehm- 
lich  vulgarsprachige  Leserkreise  in  der  Friihen  Neuzeit  erklaren  konnen. 

II.  Der  Tiibinger  Philologe  Martin  Crusius,  heute  allenfalls  durch  seinen 
Streit  mit  Nicodemus  Frischlin^  und  dem  Spezialisten  als  der  erste  Kenner 
und  Liebhaber  neugriechischer  Sprache  und  Literatur  in  Erinnerung,  war  zu 
seiner  Zeit  ein  recht  bekannter  Philologe.  Geboren  als  Pfarrerssohn  in  Gre- 
bern  nahe  Bamberg  im  Jahre  1526,  besucht  er  1540-45  das  Gymnasium  in 
Ulm  und  studiert  danach  bei  Johannes  Sturm  in  Strafiburg.  Nach  einigen  Jah- 
ren  Tatigkeit  als  Rektor  der  Lateinschule  in  Memmingen  (1554-59)  wird  er 
Griechisch-und  Lateinprofessor  in  Tiibingen,  wo  er  mit  grofiem  Erfolg  bis  zu 
seinem  Tode  im  Jahre  1607  unterrichtet.^  Er  unterhalt  vielfaltige  Kontakte 
vor  allem  mit  Gelehrten  aus  Basel  wie  dem  Drucker  Oporinus,  bei  dem  et- 
liche  seiner  zahlreichen  Werke  erscheinen,  dem  Theologen  Coelius  Secundus 
Curio  und  Johann  Jakob  Grynaeus,^  oder  aus  Wien,  wie  Johannes  Sambu- 
cus  und  Hugo  Blotius,^^  insbesondere  aber  mit  Griechen,  die  er  oft  gast- 
freundlich  in  Tiibingen  bei  sich  aufnimmt.^^ 

Von  den  iiber  50  publizierten  und  unveroffentlichten  Werken  des  unermiid- 
lichen  Vielschreibers  seien  hier  nur  die  wichtigsten  genannt:  die  umfangliche 
Turcograecia  (1584),  worin  Crusius  in  acht  Biichern  die  politische  und  religiose 
Geschichte  Konstantinopels  vom  Ende  des  14.  Jahrhunderts  bis  auf  seine  Zeit 
schreibt,^^  die  weitschweifigen  Annales  Suevici  (1595/96),  besonders  aber  die 
Tagebiicher  (Diarium),^^  die  in  neun  (!)  Banden  die  Jahre  1573-1605  umfas- 
sen,  eine  reiche  kulturhistorische  aber  auch  rezeptionsgeschichtliche  Quelle, 
die  u.a.  Einblicke  in  die  tagliche  Arbeitsweise  ihres  Verfassers  erlaubt.  Aus 


GUNTER   BERGER  483 

den  Tagebiichern  erfahrt  man  auch,  dafi  Crusius  einen  Kommentar  zu  alien 
damals  Homer  zugeschriebenen  Werken  verfafit  hat,  von  dem  allerdings  al- 
lein  der  Kommentar  zum  1.  Buch  der  Ilias  erschienen  ist  (Heidelberg,  1612).''^ 

III.  Der  Beginn  seiner  Arbeit  an  d^r  Aithiopika- Epitome  fallt  noch  in  die  Zeit 
seines  Studiums  in  Strafiburg:  Schon  1551  schickt  er  das  Werk  in  einer  ersten 
Fassung  an  seinen  Vater.  Im  August  1583  wird  es  iiberarbeitet  und  erwei- 
tert.^^  Wahrend  der  Epitome  selbst  kein  Erfolg  beschieden  war  — es  blieb  bei  der 
einzigen  von  Wechel  in  Frankfurt  im  Jahre  1584  publizierten  Ausgabe  — ,^^ 
wurde  aus  seinem  Widmungsbrief  der  Heliodors  Leben  und  Werk  im  en- 
geren  Sinne  betreffende  Teil  unter  dem  Titel  "Martini  Crusii  de  Heliodoro 
iudicium"  wie  auch  sein  Argument  in  zahlreichen  spateren  lateinisch- 
griechischen  Ausgaben  immer  wieder  abgedruckt  und  konnte  so  die  Rezep- 
tion  des  Romans  durch  das  lateinisch  lesende  Publikum  mitpragen.*^  Seine 
urspriingliche  Motivation  zur  Beschaftigung  mit  Heliodor  bestimmt  der 
Tiibinger  Gelehrte  zum  einen  als  Entspannung  ("ut  animum  iucundissima  lec- 
tione  a  laboribus  reficerem,"  p.  3),  zum  anderen  als  rhetorische  Stiliibung  ("ut 
rursus  meam  modicam  Graecae  linguae  facultatem  ex  eloquentissimo  Scrip- 
tore  alerem,"  ibid.).  Taucht  hier  schon  die  charakteristische  Verbindung  von 
prodesse  und  delectare  in  ihrer  gelehrtenspezifischen  Variante  auf,  so  lafit  Cru- 
sius die  entsprechende  Leserlenkung  noch  friiher,  und  zwar  auf  der  Titelseite, 
beginnen,  wo  er  das  horazische  Motto  "Omne  tulit  punctum,  qui  miscuit  utile 
dulci"  plaziert,  das  damit  die  Aufmerksamkeit  und  den  Blick  des  Rezipienten 
wahrend  seiner  gesamten  Lektiire  leiten  soil.  In  der  Dedicatio  selbst  lenkt  Cru- 
sius zwar  die  Aufmerksamkeit  seiner  Leser  zunachst  auf  die  in-medias-res- 
Erzahltechnik  Heliodors,  bringt  aber  auch  diese  mit  dem  Prinzip  der  Kor- 
relation  von  angenehm  und  niitzlich  in  Zusammenhang  ("propter  varietatem 
in  eis  admirabilem  rerum  iucundarum  et  utilium,"  p.  3).  Bezeichnenderweise 
sieht  er  darin  nicht  allein  einen  produktionsasthetischen  Kunstgriff  seines  Au- 
tors,  sondern  hebt  vor  allem  auf  das  spannungsfordernde  Moment  ab,  das 
den  Leser  andauernd  in  Atem  halte.  ("Quae  methodus,  non  modo  artis  est: 
sed  lectorem  etiam  in  legendo  constantem  et  avidum  retinet,"  p.  4).  Poetische 
Dignitat  verleiht  Crusius  dieser  Erzahlweise,  indem  er  als  grofie  epische  Vor- 
bilder  Homer  und  Vergil  nennt  (ebd.).  Doch  damit  nicht  genug:  Er  gewahrt 
dem  Roman  weiteren  moralisch-religiosen  Flankenschutz,  wenn  er  die 
Zuriickhaltung  des  Protagonisten  Theagenes  gegeniiber  den  liebestollen  An- 
griffen  der  Arsake  mit  dem  Verhalten  Josephs  in  Agypten  vergleicht  (ebd.). 
Ganz  auf  dieser  Linie  liegt  auch  die  Christianisierung  Heliodors  als  Bischof 
von  Trikka,  die  bei  Crusius  so  weit  geht,  dafi  er  bedauernd  feststellt,  der  Autor 
habe  seine  Darstellungskunst  und  geistigen  Krafte  leider  nicht  an  einem  christ- 
lichen  Sujet  versucht  (p.  5). 

Die  schon  30  Jahre  zuvor  unternommene  Aufwertung  des  Romans  durch 
den  erzahltechnischen  Bezug  zu  epischen  Modellen  verstarkt  der  nunmehr 
offensichtlich  poetologisch  und  dichtungstheoretisch  versierte  Crusius,  wenn 


484  RHETORIK  UND   LESERLENKUNG 

er  in  Anlehnung  an  die  aristotelische  Poetik  betont,  Fiktionalitat,  nicht  Vers- 
form  konstituiere  zuallererst  Dichtung  (p.  5). 

Im  einzelnen  manifestiert  sich  nach  Crusius  der  moralische  Nutzen,  den  der 
Rezipient  aus  der  Aithiopika-hekture  gewinnen  kann,  u.a.  in  folgenden  vier 
Punkten: 

1 .  Im  Geschick  der  Protagonisten  Charikleia  und  Theagenes  offenbart 
sich  das  Wirken  gotdicher  Providenz  und  Giite. 

2.  Dagegen  ereilt  die  Ehebrecherinnen  Demanete  und  Arsake  die  stra- 
fende  Gerechtigkeit. 

3 .  Im  athiopischen  Herrscher  Hydaspes  ist  das  Idealbild  eines  perfekten 
Konigs  exemplifiziert. 

4.  Haufig  eingestreute  Sentenzen  sind  unmittelbar  lebenspraktisch  an- 
wendbar. 

Hohen  Unterhaltungswert,  der  bezeichnenderweise  nachgeordnet  wird,  ver- 
leihen  Heliodors  Roman  die  schon  erwahnte  Erzahltechnik,  die  haufigen  Peri- 
petien  und  unerwarteten  Zusammentreffen,  die  beim  Leser  vielfaltige  notBri 
hervorrufen,  nicht  zuletzt  auch  Furcht  und  Hoffnung.  Derart  vorbereitet,  wun- 
dert  man  sich  nicht,  wenn  Crusius  das  Werk  als  eine  Art  Tragikomodie  be- 
zeichnet  (p.  8).  Diesen  Versuch  einer  Gattungszuweisung  kann  er  zusatzUch 
mit  dem  Verweis  auf  einige  der  zahlreichen  Theatermetaphern  der  Aithiopika 
untermauern.  Erstaunen  allerdings  mufi  die  Interpretation  der  aristotehschen 
Katharsis  durch  Crusius,  der  sie  im  Gegensatz  zur  Mehrzahl  seiner  Zeitgenos- 
sen  offensichthch  als  asthetische  Kategorie  fafit:  "hinc  denique  multipUcia  & 
dulcissima  TcdcGr):  iXizlhtc^  xai  96P01,  XuTrai  xat  x^9^^'-  condimenta  Poema- 
tum  excellentium  insignia"  (p.  8). 

Auf  den  Herausgeber  der  ed.  princ. ,  Opsopoeus,  beruft  er  sich  explizit,  wenn 
er  den  wissensvermittelnden  Charakter  der  Beschreibungen  Hehodors  unter- 
streicht,  die  er,  ebenso  ungewohnlich,  gleichfalls  dem  delectare  zuschlagt.  Mog- 
hcherweise  unterUegt  er  hier  ganz  einfach  dem  selbstauferlegten  Zwang  zur 
Systematisierung  unter  die  horazischen  Kategorien.  Dagegen  bleibt  seine  Sub- 
sumierung  der  stihstischen  Vorziige  Hehodors  unter  das  delectare  ("Eloquen- 
tiam  in  toto  opere  copiosam,  elegantem,  dulcem,  et  omnino  mirandam, 
videmus,"  p.  8)  ganz  im  Rahmen  der  Tradition. 

Abschhefiend  empfiehlt  Crusius  seinen  Autor  aus  sprachhchen  wie  aus  in- 
halthchen  Griinden  geradezu  als  Jugend-  und  implizit  gar  als  Schullektiire, 
wenn  er  ihn  im  Blick  auf  die  keusche  Liebesdarstellung  dem  traditionellen 
Schulautor  Terenz  vorzieht:  "Castissimus  enim  hie  Theagenis  et  Charicleae 
amor  describitur:  non  impurus,  sicut  in  Terentii  comoediis"  (p.  9  s.). 

So  beredt  sich  der  Tiibinger  Gelehrte  iiber  die  Vorziige  des  von  ihm  epi- 
tomierten  Werkes  aufiert,  so  schweigsam  bleibt  er  zum  Verfahren  der  Epi- 
tomierung  selbst,  beschrankt  er  sich  doch  auf  wenige  Worte  zum  Kommentar 
("Observationes"),  den  er  zusatzlich  jedem  Erzahlkapitel  anhangt.  In  seinem 


GUNTER   BERGER  485 

Kommentar  werde  er  aus  den  Aithiopika  selbst  moralische  Sentenzen,  beson- 
ders  gegliickte  Formulierungen  und  Wendungen  sowie  beschreibende  Episoden 
auswahlen  und  Parallelstellen  aus  Autoren  verschiedener  Literaturen  beibrin- 
gen  (p.  12). 

Ohne  dafi  er,  wie  gesagt,  darauf  einginge,  steht  Crusius  freilich  in  einer  Ian- 
gen,  ins  4.  vorchrisdiche  Jahrhundert  zuriickverfolgbaren  Tradition  der  Epi- 
tome als  spezifischer  Rezeptions-  und  Tradierungsform  von  Texten,  die  im 
folgenden  kurz  vorgestellt  werden  soU.^  Urspriinglich  entstanden  und  auchf 
spater  vorwiegend  praktiziert  in  historiographischen  und  fachliterarischen  Gat- 
tungen,  hat  die  Epitome  mit  anderen  sekundaren  Textsorten  wie  Argument 
(Hypothesis),  Florileg,  Katene,  Perioche,  Paraphrase  usw,  den  Charakter  der 
Verkiirzung  gemein,  unterscheidet  sich  aber  von  jenen  durch  grofiere  Ei- 
genstandigkeit  in  der  Textverarbeitung.  Neben  der  schon  erwahnten  Kiirze 
verweisen  "die  Ausrichtung  auf  Inhalt,  nicht  Form  der  Vorlage,  die  Beschran- 
kung  auf  erzahlende  und  darlegende  Prosa"  auf  die  vorwiegend  informierende 
Funktion  der  Epitome. ^^  Die  Bandbreite  der  Kiirzungen  variiert  stark,  be- 
wegt  sich  aber  zumeist  im  Rahmen  von  einem  Drittel  bis  einem  Fiinftel  der 
Vorlage.  Dem  Verfahren  der  Zusammenfassung  und  Kiirzung  fallen  insbe- 
sondere  direkte  Rede  und  "erlauternde  oder  beispielhafte  Details  und 
schmiickende  Einlagen  der  Darstellung"  zum  Opfer.^'  Dieses  Verfahren  ist 
oft  mit  stilistischen  Anderungen  verbunden,  deren  Varianzbreite  "von  der  ab- 
soluten  Worttreue  bis  zum  Streben  nach  stilistischer  Emanzipation"  reicht.^^ 

Bevor  wir  uns  der  spezifischen  Methode  der  Epitomierung  in  unserem  Text 
zuwenden,  ist  noch  vorauszuschicken,  dafi  Crusius  im  Unterschied  zu  den  Epi- 
tomatoren  historiographischer  oder  Sachtexte  mit  dem  besonderen  Problem 
der  Textkoharenz  konfrontiert  ist,  die  einen  erzahlenden  fiktionalen  Text  wie 
die  Aithiopika  im  Gegensatz  zu  jenen  auszeichnet. 

Ganz  im  Sinne  der  Tradition  kiirzt  der  Tiibinger  Gelehrte  die  iiberaus  zahl- 
reichen  Dialoge  d^r  Aithiopika^  meist  in  Form  des  Redeberichts  oder  der  Trans- 
formation von  direkter  in  indirekte  Rede,  wobei  er  sich  jedoch  bemiiht,  die 
besonders  pathetischen  Momente  der  Dialoge  in  wortlicher  Ubersetzung  zu 
erhalten.  Insbesondere  gilt  dies  fiir  einen  speziellen  Typ  direkter  Rede  des 
heHodorschen  Werks,  die  Orakel,  die  er  grundsatzlich  weitestgehend  wortlich 
und  in  Versen  iibertragt.  Gelegentlich  geht  er  gar  wirkungsasthetisch  noch 
liber  das  Original  hinaus,  indem  er  indirekte  in  direkte  Rede  transponiert, 
z.B.  im  Falle  des  Schuldbekenntnisses  der  ionischen  Zofe  {Aith.  VIII,  9,3  = 
Epitome,  246)  oder  wenig  spater,  als  Charikleia  selbst  ihre  Schuld  bekennt  {Aith. 
VIII,  9,7  =  Epitome,  249).  Offensichtlich  gelten  dem  Ubersetzer  derartige  Pas- 
sagen  als  rhetorische  Kabinettstiicke,  die  er  dem  Leser  auch  als  solche  prasen- 
tieren  will,  sei  es  als  Modelle  zur  Einiibung  in  die  rhetorische  Praxis  der 
Abfassung  von  Reden  oder  lediglich  zur  Erregung  von  Pathos. 

Nachst  den  Dialogen  fallen  insbesondere  die  beschreibenden  Partien  dem 
Verfahren  der  Epitomierung  zum  Opfer,  wenn  entweder  szenische  Vorfiih- 


486  RHETORIK  UND   LESERLENKUNG 

rung  in  statisches  Tableau  verwandelt  wird  — etwa  Charikleia  in  der  Eingangs- 
szene  des  Romans  {Aith.  1,1  =  Epitome,  21)  — oder  detaillierte  Schilderungen 
sich  zu  kahlen  Aufzahlungen  reduzieren  —  etwa  im  Falle  der  Kampfe  zwischen 
Persern  und  Athiopiern  (Aith.  IX,  13  ff.  =  Epitome,  277  ff.).  Immerhin  zitiert 
Crusius  hier,  wie  schon  im  Widmungsbrief  angekiindigt,  einige  besonders 
herausragende  beschreibende  Passagen  in  den  "Observationes"  im  Original 
(p.  281).  Ediche  dieser  beschreibenden  Partien,  die  schon  bei  Heliodor  offen- 
bar  wissensvermittelnde  Funktion  haben,  geben  Crusius  Anlafi  zu  Erlau- 
terungen  und  Erklarungen  in  den  "Observationes,"  wo  er  in  Hiille  und  Fiille 
gelehrte  Autoritaten  von  der  Antike  bis  zur  Friihen  Neuzeit  zitiert  oder  Par- 
allelstellen  aus  Autoren  antiker  und  nachantiker  Tradition  beibringt.  So  be- 
legt  er  die  von  Heliodor  als  "unermefilich"  bezeichnete  Tiefe  des  Nildeltas  {Aith. 
1,5,2)  mit  einem  Verweis  auf  Athenaus  und  vergleicht  die  Beschreibung  der 
dort  wohnenden  rauberischen  Hirten  mit  der  entsprechenden  Schilderung  bei 
Achilles  Tatios  (p.  28)  oder  zieht  anlafilich  einer  Gerichtsrede  des  Aristipp, 
der  seinen  Sohn  Knemon  des  Mordversuches  bezichtigt,  zur  Erlauterung  des 
athenischen  Gerichtsverfahrens  Demosthenes  und  Lysias  heran  und  notiert  am 
Rand  dazu  das  Prinzip:  "Audiatur  et  altera  pars"  (Aith.  1,13  =  Epitome,  34). 
Schliefilich  —  um  ein  letztes  derartiges  Beispiel  anzufiihren  —  liefert  er  zu  der 
detaillierten  Beschreibung  der  Geschenke  der  Troglodyten  und  Blemmyer  an 
den  athiopischen  Herrscher  Hydaspes  ausfiihrliche  Erklarungen  und  belehrt 
den  Leser  iiber  eine  besonders  befremdlich  anmutende  Gabe,  das  "Kamel- 
pardel,"  mit  Hinweisen  auf  Georgios  Pachymeres  und  Plinius  (Aith.  X,27  = 
Epitome,  316-20). 

Wir  hatten  schon  gesehen,  wie  ein  typisches  Verfahren  der  Erzahlfiktion, 
die  szenische  Darstellung,  im  Zuge  der  Epitomierung  zum  Tableau  erstarrt. 
Als  ein  weiteres  Mittel  der  Verkiirzung  dient  Crusius  die  Beschrankung  auf 
das  Resultat  derartiger  Szenen.  Wo  z.B.  Heliodor  ein  ganzes  Kapitel  beno- 
tigt,  (11,15),  Charikleias,  Knemons  und  Theagenes'  Verzweiflung  und 
Lahmung  zu  schildern,  die  sie  schliefilich  nach  langen  Kampfen  in  den  Schlaf 
zwingen,  bilanziert  der  Epitomator  kurz  angebunden  mit  einem  "somnus  ex 
lassitudine  et  curis  obrepit"  (p.  67),  zitiert  dann  allerdings  die  gesamte  Szene 
in  den  "Observationes,"  um  sie  mit  der  Randnotiz  "somnus  ex  defatigatione 
et  curis"  endgiiltig  auf  den  Begriff  zu  bringen  (p.  68).  Begrifflichkeit  statt  sze- 
nischer  Darstellung  setzt  Crusius  generell  als  probates  Mittel  der  Abbreviatur 
ein:  Wahrend  Heliodor  plastisch  schildert,  wie  die  Einwohner  von  Delphi  in 
ihrem  Eifer,  den  Charikleia-Entfiihrer  Theagenes  zu  verfolgen,  sich  gegen- 
seitig  zu  iibertrumpfen  suchen  (IV,  21,2),  bekommt  der  Leser  der  Epitome  al- 
lein  die  nackten  Begriffe  vorgesetzt:  "homines  omnis  generis,  aetatis,  sexus 
Charicleae  dolore  ad  persequendum  se  effundere"  (p.  136).  Dieses  Verfahren 
gerat  beinahe  zur  Karikatur,  wenn  Heliodors  Beschreibung  der  Opfer  und 
Prozession  in  Delphi  zu  Ehren  Apolls  (III,  1-4),  vom  antiken  Autor  offensicht- 
lich  als  besonderes  Prunkstiick  angesehen  und  daher  auch  entsprechend  be- 


GUNTER   BERGER  487 

tont  eingefiihrt  (III,  1,2),  derart  begrifflich  gefafit  wird,  dafi  die  Einzelpartien 
der  Beschreibung  in  Form  von  Uberschriften  geboten  werden:  ("de  Hecatombe" 
.  .  .  "de  duobus  puichris  Thessalarum  puellarum  choris"  .  .  .  "de  quinquaginta 
Thessalorum  iuvenum  .  .  .")  (p.  93). 

Zu  allem  Uberflufi  fallt  Crusius  am  Ende  dieser  Episode  vollig  aus  dem 
Erzahlen  heraus  und  landet  unversehens  auf  der  Ebene  der  Metasprache, 
indem  er  die  detaillierte  Schilderung  des  Aufieren  Charikleias  wie  folgt  kom- 
mentiert:  "cuius  tunica,  zona,  coma,  arcus  et  fax,  particulatim  (ut  et  priora 
omnia)  prolixeque  describuntur,  ut  res  ornatissimae"  (p.  93  s.).  Dieses  Her- 
ausfallen  aus  der  Erzahlerrolle  unterlauft  dem  Epitomator  aus  dem  Bemii- 
hen  heraus,  dem  Leser  nichts  unerklart  zu  lassen,  noch  haufiger.  So  setzt  er 
einmal  verdeutlichend  hinzu:  "Sed  ne  quis  quaerat,  qui  nam  fuerint  illi  hostes: 
sciat  fuisse  superiores  latrones  qui  apud  Heracleotium  ostium  Thyamidem  fu- 
gerant"  (p.  54,  vgl.  Aith.  1,32).  Ein  anderes  Mai  ruft  er  dem  Leser  auf  diese 
Weise  die  Identitat  einer  Nebenfigur  des  Romans,  Charikleias  ionischer  Zofe, 
in  Erinnerung:  "Concedunt  ergo,  puellae  illi  lonicae,  quam  supra  ad  Chari- 
cleam  ab  Arsaca  missam  docuimus"  (p.  245,  vgl.  Aith.  VIII, 5). 

Andererseits  entspringt  die  Tendenz  zur  Umsetzung  von  Beschreibung  und 
Handlung  in  Begrifflichkeit  bei  Crusius  nicht  allein  dem  Zwang  zur  Kiirzung, 
sondern  zumindest  ebensosehr  dem  Bediirfnis  zum  lehrhaften  Moralisieren, 
das  sich  zumal  in  den  "Observationes"  manifestiert.  Gleich  zu  Anfang  des  Ro- 
mans etwa  vergleicht  er  die  Zuriickhaltung  des  Thyamis  mit  dem  entspre- 
chenden  Verhalten  Alexanders  des  Grofeen  und  lenkt  die  Aufmerksamkeit  des 
Lesers  auf  solch  vorbildliche  Handlungsweise  mit  der  Randbemerkung  "Con- 
tinentia  principis"  (p.  28).  In  solchen  Fallen  pflegt  er  dann  auch  nicht  selten 
die  Originalpassagen  aus  den  Aithiopika  zu  zitieren,  sozusagen  als  Belege  fur 
die  moralisch  exemplarische  Handlungsweise,  etwa  die  Grofiziigigkeit  des  athi- 
opischen  Konigs  Hydaspes,  der  einem  Untertanen  eine  eigentlich  ihm  selbst 
zustehende  Kriegsbeute  iiberlafit  {Aith.  IX, 23, 5).  Crusius  bringt  dieses  Ver- 
halten auf  den  Begriff  "Munificentia  regis"  (p.  286).  Umgekehrt  dienen  ne- 
gativ  gezeichnete  Charaktere  wie  die  mannstolle  Stiefmutter  des  Knemon, 
Demanete,  oder  die  Kupplerin  Kybele  als  warnende  und  abschreckende  Ex- 
empel.  Zu  einer  Passage,  in  der  Kybele  ihre  Erfahrenheit  in  Liebeshandeln 
unter  Beweis  stellt  {Aith.  VII, 20, 5),  bemerkt  Crusius  mit  warnend  erhobenem 
Zeigefmger:  "Ein  schandliche  lose  alte  Kupplerin.  Caveat  sibi  omnis  inventus 
a  talibus"  (p.  219). 

Die  zahlreichen  in  den  Erzahlzusammenhang  eingestreuten  Reflexionen, 
Sentenzen  und  Sprichworter  lafit  Crusius  prinzipiell  im  erzahlenden  Teil 
seiner  Epitome  weg,  um  sie  erst  in  die  sich  jeweils  anschliefienden  "Observa- 
tiones" als  Originalzitate  einzubringen  und  ihnen  deutsche  Entsprechungen 
oder  solche  aus  anderen  Nationalliteraturen  folgen  zu  lassen.  Dsunit  werden 
diese  statischen  Textelemente,  die  bei  Heliodor  zugleich  Abschlufi  und  Hohe- 
punkt  erzahlender  oder  beschreibender  Passagen  bilden,   vollig  aus  dem 


488  RHETORIK  UND  LESERLENKUNG 

Handlungs-  und  Erzahlzusammenhang  isoliert  und  gewinnen  an  Selbstan- 
digkeit  und  Eigengewicht,  indem  sie  den  Blick  des  Lesers  starker  und  kon- 
zentrierter  an  sich  ziehen.  Freilich  geht  mit  diesem  Gewinn  zugleich  notwendig 
ein  Verlust  an  erzahltechnischer  Kontinuitat  und  Koharenz  einher.  Einige 
Beispiele  mogen  dieses  Verfahren  illustrieren:  So  zitiert  er  in  den  "Observa- 
tiones"  (p.  39  s.)  eine  in  die  Aithiopika  eingestreute  (1, 14,4)  Hesiod-Sentenz  iiber 
die  oft  erst  spat  strafende  gottliche  Gerechtigkeit,  iibersetzt  sie  ins  Lateini- 
sche  und  vergleicht  damit  Ariost,  Orlando  furioso ,  XXXVII,  105 

La  qua!  (sc.  vendetta,  G.B.)  se  ben  tarda  a  venir,  compensa 
I'indugio  poi,  con  punizione  immensa. 

An  einer  anderen  Stelle  zitiert  er  die  von  Charikleia  geaufierte  Lebensweisheit, 
dafi  die  Zeit  oft  unverhoffte  Rettung  bringe  (Aith.  1,26,4)  und  bestarkt  sie  mit 
dem  deutschen  Sprichwort  "Ein  nacht  ist  offt  Golds  wert"  (p.  49).  Am  haufig- 
sten  legt  Heliodor  dem  altersweisen  Priester  Kalasiris  sprichwortliche  Redens- 
arten  in  den  Mund;  so  lafit  er  ihn  einmal  klagen  "xujxa,  9aiaiv,  im  xu[xa 
7cpoie(BaXXev  6  Baifxcov"  (Aith.  V,20,l).  Crusius  begniigt  sich  nicht  allein  damit, 
diese  Redensart  zu  zitieren,  sondern  zieht  auch  Entsprechungen  aus  Aischy- 
los'  Hiketiden  und  dem  Amadis  heran  (p.  156  f.). 

Wenngleich  Crusius  gleichsam  vorbeugend  die  keusche  Liebesdarstellung 
der  Aithiopika  schon  im  Widmungsbrief  preist,  so  bleibt  dennoch  die  Empfeh- 
lung  eines  antiken  Liebesromans  als  Jugendlektiire  ein  nicht  unproblemati- 
sches  Unterfangen,  wie  etliche  Warnungen  und  distanzierende  Bemerkungen 
des  Epitomators  in  seinen  "Observationes"  beweisen.  So  kann  er  nicht  umhin, 
Charikleias  Lob  des  Jungfrauenstandes  {Aith.  11,33,5)  einschrankend  aus  christ- 
lich-protestantischer  Perspektive  zu  kommentieren:  "sed  matrimonium  reiici 
non  debet"  (p.  88).  Ein  andermal  verweist  er  explizit  auf  die  historische  Dif- 
ferenz  des  Textes  zur  aktuellen  Situation  des  Lesers,  wenn  er  zur  Entfiihrung 
Charikleias  durch  Theagenes  {Aith.  IV,  17,5)  bemerkt:  "Apud  Christianos,  capi- 
tale  hoc  fuisset"  (p.  137). 

Noch  manifester  wird  die  Problematik  der  historischen  Differenz  des  anti- 
ken  Textes  im  ideologischen  Bereich.  Dafi  sich  Crusius  dieser  Problematik 
vollig  bewufit  ist,  kann  eine  Art  "Gebrauchsanweisung"  in  den  "Observationes" 
lehren,  die  auf  den  heutigen  Interpreten  in  ihrer  Naivitat  beinahe  belustigend 
wirkt:  Auf  ein  Zitat  einer  Passage  dtr  Aithiopika  (VI, 7,1),  wo  der  Priester  Ka- 
lasiris dem  Kaufmann  Nausikles  gute  Wiinsche  fiir  Reise  und  geschaftlichen 
Erfolg  mit  auf  den  Weg  gibt,  lafit  Crusius  einen  langeren  Kommentar  fol- 
gen,  aus  dem  hier  lediglich  die  Kernsatze  zitiert  seien:  "Est  elegans  bene  pre- 
candi  Mercatori  navigaturo  forma,  sed  Ethnica:  ideoque  nobis,  qui  Christo 
nomen  dedimus,  hoc  modo  non  adhibenda.  Quare  igitur  eam,  et  huiusmodi 
alia  inter  observationes  pono?  Tanquam  formulam  ad  imitandum,  sed  pie  mu- 
tatis mutandis"  (p.  182).  Nicht  immer  allerdings  reichen  derartige  Umdeutun- 
gen  und  Distanzierungen  aus,  um  die  pragmatische  Dimension  des  antiken 


GUNTER  BERGER  489 

Werkes  auch  fiir  den  Leser  der  Friihen  Neuzeit  zu  erhalten:  So  sieht  sich  der 
Kommentator  offensichtlich  gezwungen,  die  zentralen  Ausfiihrungen  des 
Erzahlers  der  Aithiopika  iiber  die  Deutung  von  Mysterien  {Aith.  IX, 9, 5)  so- 
wohl  im  Text  als  auch  in  den  "Observationes"  zu  unterschlagen.  Andererseits 
aber  scheut  er  sich  auch  wiederum  nicht,  anlafiUch  der  Feuerprobe  Charik- 
leias  {Aith.  VIII, 9)  auf  die  aktuelle  Praxis  der  Hexenprozesse  ausfiihrlich  ein- 
zugehen  und  ihre  Form  der  Rechtsfindung  aus  einer  beinahe 
friihaufklarerischen  Position  heraus  zu  kritisieren  (pp.  250-254).  Gerade  die 
zahlreichen  historischen  Belege,  mit  denen  er  seine  Kritik  an  den  Hexenpro- 
zessen  untermauert,  lassen  die  Aithiopika  eine  in  diesem  Bereich  vollig  uner- 
wartete  und  iiberraschende  pragmatische  Dimension  gewinnen,  deren 
pointierte  Herausarbeitung  man  dem  sonst  doch  recht  vorsichtig-orthodox  ope- 
rierenden  Tiibinger  Philologen  nicht  ohne  weiteres  zugetraut  hatte. 

Fassen  wir  zusammen!  Martin  Crusius  ist  es  ohne  Zweifel  gelungen,  seinen 
Zeitgenossen  zu  zeigen,  dafi  auch  ein  griechischer  Liebesroman  Gegenstand 
ernsthafter  Lektiire  mit  lebenspraktischer  Anwendung  sein  kann.  Er  erreicht 
dies  durch  die  aufiere  Anlage  seiner  Epitome,  insbesondere  die  Trennung  von 
erzahlendem  und  kommentierendem  Teil,  der  sowohl  quantitativ  als  auch 
drucktechnisch  die  Aufmerksamkeit  des  Lesers  starker  beansprucht,  durch  die 
Betonung  der  pragmatischen  Dimension  des  Textes  und  nicht  zuletzt  durch 
die  Verbindung  von  profunder  humanistischer  Gelehrsamkeit  mit  weitgefa- 
cherter  Kenntnis  der  vulgarsprachhchen  Literatur,  die  sich  in  Sacherklarungen 
und  im  Aufweis  von  Parallel stellen  niederschlagen.  Dafi  bei  einem  solchen  Ver- 
fahren  der  Textverarbeitung  allerdings  das  asthetische  Vergniigen  an 
Heliodors  kunstvoller  Erzahltechnik  und  stilistischer  Eleganz,  ja  an  der  Text- 
koharenz  iiberhaupt,  weitgehend  auf  der  Strecke  bleibt,  steht  auf  einem  an- 
deren  Blatt.  Ob  die  geringe  Resonanz  der  Epitome  bei  dem  von  Crusius 
avisierten  Publikum  u.a.  auch  darauf  zuriickzufiihren  ist,  lafit  sich  angesichts 
des  Mangels  an  Rezeptionszeugnissen  nicht  beantworten. 


Anmerkungen 


1 .  Nach  H.  Gartner,  "Charikleia  in  Byzanz,"  in:  Antike  und  Abendland  15,  1969,  47-69, 
hier  besonders  47-54. 

2.  Auch  dazu  Gartner  (wie  Anm.  1)  54  ff. 

3.  Zur  Editionsgeschichte  vgl.  O.  Mazal,  "Die  Textausgaben  der 'Aithiopika'  Heliodors 
von  Emesa,"  in:  Gutenberg-Jahrbuch  41,  1966,  182-91. 

4.  Vgl.  Verf.,  "Legitimation  und  Modell:  Die  'Aithiopika'  als  Prototyp  des  franzo- 
sischen  heroisch-galanten  Romans,"  in:  Antike  und  Abendland  30,  1984,  177-89,  hier 
178-82. 

5.  Vgl.  Amyots  Vorwort  zur  iiberarbeiteten  Version  seiner  Ubersetzung  von  1559; 
auch  dazu  Verf.  (wie  Anm.  4)  182  f. 


490  *  RHETORIK  UND  LESERLENKUNG 

6.  Ebd.  und  D.  Stone  Jr.,  "Amyot,  The  Classical  Tradition,  and  Early  French  Fic- 
tion," in:  Res publica  litterarum  2,  1979,  319-25  sowie  G.  N.  Sandy,  "Classical  Forerun- 
ners of  the  Theory  and  Practice  of  Prose  Romance  in  France.  Studies  in  the  Narrative 
Form  of  Minor  French  Romances  of  the  Sixteenth  and  Seventeenth  Centuries,"  in:  An- 
tike  und  Abendland  28,  1982,  169-91. 

7.  Nachgezeichnet  bei  R.  Stahlecker,  "Martin  Crusius  und  Nicodemus  Frischlin," 
in:  Zeitschrift  fiir  Wurttembergische  Landesgeschichte  7,  1943,  323-66. 

8.  Zu  seiner  Lehrtatigkeit  vgl.  N.  Hofmann,  Die  Artistenfakultdt  an  der  Universitdt 
Tubingen  1534-1601,  Tubingen  1982,  passim. 

9.  Vgl.  T.  Wilhelmi,  "Martin  Crusius  als  Beniitzer  griechischer  Handschriften  der 
Universitatsbibliothek  Basel,"  in:  Codices  manuscripti  6,  1980,  25-40. 

10.  Zu  ihrer  Korrespondenz  H.  Gerstinger,  "Martin  Crusius'  Briefwechsel  mit  den 
Wiener  Gelehrten  Hugo  Blotius  und  Johannes  Sambucus  (1581-1599),"  in:  Byzantini- 
sche  Zeitschrift  30,  1929/30,  202-11. 

1 1 .  Dariiber  informiert  B.  A.  Mystakides  in  mehreren  Veroffentlichungen,  u.a.  "Ex- 
cerpta  Crusiana,"  in:  Forschungen  und  Versuche  zur  Geschichte  des  Mittelalters  und  der  Neuzeit. 
Festschrift  D.  Schdfer,  Jena  1915,  500-27;  "Notes  sur  Martin  Crusius.  Ses  livres,  ses  ouv- 
rages  et  ses  manuscrits,"  in:  Revue  des  etudes  grecques  1 1 ,  1898,  279-306.  Aufschlufireiches 
Material  mit  griindlichem  Kommentar  bei  O.  Kresten,  "Ein  Empfehlungsschreiben 
des  Erzbischofs  Gabriel  von  Achrida  fiir  Leontios  Eustratios  Philoponos  an  Martin  Cru- 
sius (Vind.Suppl.Gr.  142),"  in:  Rivista  di Studi  bizantini e  neoellenici,  N.S.  6-7,  1969-1970, 
93-125. 

12.  Dazu  Ch.  de  Clercq,  "La  Turcograecia  de  Martin  Crusius  et  les  patriarches  de 
Constantinople  de  1453  a  1583,"  in:  Orientalia  Christiana  periodica  33,  1967,  210-20. 

13.  Publiziert  ist  leider  nur  der  die  Jahre  1596-1605  betreffende  Teil:  Diarium  Mar- 
tini Crusii,  Bd.  I  1596-1597.  Bd.  II  1598-1599,  hg.  von  W.  Goz  und  E.  Conrad.  Bd. 
Ill  1600-1605,  unter  Mitwirkung  von  R.  Rau  u.  H.  Widmann,  hg.  von  R.  Stahlecker 
u.  E.  Staiger,  Tubingen  1927-1961. 

14.  Nach  R.  Stahlecker,  "Martin  Crusius,  der  erste  deutsche  Verfasser  eines  Kom- 
mentars  zum  gesamten  Homer,"  in:  Philologische  Wochenschrift  45-48,  1939,  Sp. 
1196-1207. 

15.  Vgl.  V.  Myllerus,  De  vita  et  obitu  .  .  .  Martini  Crusii,  Tubingae  (Ph.  Gruppen- 
bach)  1608,  13. 

16.  Ebd.,  26. 

17.  Der  genaue  Titel  lautet:  Martini  Crusii  Aethiopicae  Heliodori  Historiae  Epitome.  Cum 
observationibus  eiusdem,  Francofurti  (J.  Wechelus)  1584. 

18.  Heidelberg  (H.  Commelinus)  1596;  Lyon  (A.  de  Harsy)  1611,  im  Grunde  ein 
Nachdruck  der  Commelinus- Ausgabe;  Frankfurt  (G.  Fitzer)  1631,  vgl.  Mazal  (wie  Anm. 
3)  185-87. 

19.  Vgl.  I.  Opeh,  "Epitome,"  in:  RAC,  Bd.  V  Sp.  944-73. 

20.  Ebd.,  945. 

21.  Ebd.,  961. 

22.  Ebd.,  962. 


Un  Vrai  Dialogue: 
Le  De  Philologia  de  Guillaume  Bude 

Marie-Madeleine  de  la  Garanderie 


Nous  proposons  ci-dessous  une  etude  litteraire  du  De  philologia 
de  Guillaume  Bude.  Rappelons  que  ce  petit  livre,  dedie  aux 
"enfants  de  France,"  Henri  d'Orleans  et  Charles  d'An- 
gouleme,  et  presente  en  deux  livres  sous  la  forme  de  dialogues  entre 
Francois  P'^  et  I'auteur,  est  sorti  des  presses  parisiennes  de  Josse  Bade 
en  novembre  1532,  conjointement  avec  le  De  studio  literarum  recte  &  com- 
mode instituendo.  Dans  cet  "ensemble"  qui  celebre  sur  des  modes  differents 
I'humanisme  alors  en  expansion  et  en  faveur,  le  De  studio  represente  le 
volet  philosophique  et  religieux,  le  De  philologia  le  volet  politique. 

Parler  du  De  philologia  comme  d'un  "vrai  dialogue"  appelle  une  breve  ex- 
plication. En  effet,  comme  les  contemporains  I'ont  maintes  fois  rapporte,  et 
comme  on  pent  le  lire  en  plusieurs  endroits  du  De  philologia,  le  roi  Francois 
I"  aimait,  lorsqu'il  etait  a  table,  ecouter  une  lecture,  a  propos  de  laquelle 
eventuellement,  s'il  se  trouvait  autour  de  lui  quelques  hommes  d'esprit  et  de 
science,  il  lui  arrivait  de  poser  des  questions,  et  de  susciter  des  discussions. 
Propos  de  table.  Propos  de  cour.  Ces  dialogues  se  deroulaient  evidemment 
en  frangais.  Aussi  bien  le  roi  n'avait-il  du  latin  qu'une  connaissance  tres 
moyenne,  et  les  assistants  souvent  moins  encore.  Or  le  De  philologia  se  presente 
comme  le  compte-rendu  de  conversations  entre  le  roi  et  Bude,  et  rapporte 
celles-ci  en  latin.  II  ne  s'agit  done  pas,  c'est  trop  evident,  de  "vrais  dialogues" 
au  sens  de:  dialogues  reels,  tels  que  seraient  de  nos  jours  des  interviews  ou 
des  debats  enregistres.  Certes  des  conversations  sur  la  conception  de  la  cul- 
ture, les  rapports  de  la  culture  et  de  la  politique,  —  sujets  du  De  philologia— , 
eurent  reellement  lieu,  sans  doute  possible,  entre  le  roi  et  Bude,  depuis  que 
I'attention  du  roi  avait  ete  attiree  sur  Bude,  et  que  celui-ci  s'etait  fait  aupres 
du  roi  le  porte-parole  et  I'avocat  de  Thumanisme.  Mais  le  De  philologia  y  precis6- 
ment,  transpose  ces  conversations  dans  un  texte  hautement  litteraire,  puisque 
neo-latin.  II  est  certain  en  effet  que  le  changement  de  code  linguistique  fa- 


492  LE  DE  PHILOLOGIA  DE  GUILLAUME  BUDE 

vorise  la  transmutation  de  I'echange  oral  et  vecu  en  texte,  en  oeuvre  d'art.  La 
verite  du  De  philologia  est  done  verite  d'art:  c'est  le  pouvoir  de  produire  I'il- 
lusion. 

Or  ce  pouvoir  que  detiennent  si  fortement,  selon  leurs  modes  propres,  le 
roman,  et  — plus  proche  de  la  forme  qui  nous  interesse— le  theatre,  le  dia- 
logue se  I'arroge  rarement.  S'il  se  rapproche  du  theatre  dans  la  mesure  ou 
il  fait  parler  des  personnages,  il  se  prete  plus  particulierement  au  debat  d'idees. 
On  y  dispute  pro  et  contra  comme  dans  la  vieille  disputatio  scolastique.  Ou  bien 
une  seule  voix,  celle  du  maitre,  I'emporte,  ne  laissant  au  disciple  que  le  soin 
de  repondre  "assurement":  on  reconnait  ici  la  caricature  du  procede  maieu- 
tique  platonicien.  Ou  bien  le  dialogue  oppose  un  sage  a  quelque  naif  ou  a 
quelque  fou,  en  qui  subsiste  juste  assez  de  raison  pour  maintenir  une  utile  am- 
bigui'te,  ce  qui  correspond  au  schema  erasmien.  De  toutes  manieres  le  dia- 
logue apparait  comme  un  genre  statique,  ou  la  verite  s'est  refugiee  dans 
I'abstraction,  et  o\x  les  personnages  ne  sont  guere  autre  chose  que  les  vete- 
ments  de  I'ideologie. 

En  revanche,  quand  nous  disons  que  le  De  philologia  est  un  "vrai  dialogue," 
nous  entendons  qu'il  met  face-a-face  deux  personnages  a  part  entiere  I'un  et 
I'autre  (le  second  n'etant  pas  reduit  comme  d'ordinaire  a  la  fonction  de  sim- 
ple "utilite"  ou  "faire-valoir"),  et  qu'il  les  fait  parler  non  seulement  selon  la  cohe- 
rence du  sujet,  mais  selon  celle  de  caracteres.  Bref  nous  parlons  theatre. 

Theatre  sans  spectacle,  mais  oii  celui-ci  est  fort  bien  suggere  par  des  in- 
dications concernant  I'orientation  du  corps  et  de  la  parole  (conversus,  reflexus, 
ore  deducto,  aversa facie,  etc.),  le  regard  (perlustrans) ,  les  marques  d'interet  et  d'at- 
tente  (suspensus),  I'approbation  (cum  annuissem),  les  rires  et  sourires  (arridens,  sub- 
ridens),  etc.  Toutefois  I'eclairage  projete  sur  chacun  des  deux  personnages  n'est 
pas  le  meme.  Ceux-ci  en  effet  n'ont  pas  le  meme  statut.  Puisque  Bude  est 
a  la  fois  personnage  et  auteur, 

—  il  a,  en  tant  qu'auteur,  une  connaissance  du  dedans  de  son  propre  per- 
sonnage et  peut  en  evoquer  de  maniere  precise  et  suggestive  les  di- 
vers sentiments  (perculsus,  obstrictus,  aestuans,  haesitus,  recreatus,  plausum 
expectans,  etc.). 

—  il  observe,  epie  litterzilement  le  visage  royal,  dechiffrant  pour  ainsi 
dire  Vaugurium  ex  genio  frontis .  On  notera  la  frequence  de  mots  comme 
ore,  vultu,  facie.  Les  expressions  du  roi,  —s'il  est  permis  d'imaginer  de 
tout  cela  une  adaptation  cinematographique  — ,  seraient  les  images 
dont  le  deroulement  accompagnerait,  et  refleterait,  le  discours  de 
Bude. 


MARIE-MADELEINE  DE  LA  GARANDERIE  ^go 

Le  decor 

Le  lieu  de  la  scene  est  la  maison  du  roi,  lors  d'un  repas,  ou  apres  un  repas 
(il  est  question  a  deux  reprises,  f°22  v°  et  f°68  v°/  de  la  corona  mensae).  Les 
deux  interlocuteurs  ne  sont  pas  seuls.  Des  assistants  (circumstantes)  sont  la,  qui 
participent  avec  interet  (aures  pronas)  ou  cimusement  (circumfusam  turbam  ridi- 
bundam),  quelquefois  malicieusement,  guettant  un  faux-pas  de  I'orateur  im- 
prudent (cf.  f  68  v°).  Eventuellement  c'est  a  eux  que  le  parleur  s'adresse  (f° 
29,  39).  Au  f°  22  v°  il  est  question  d'un  lecteur  qui  fait  une  lecture  historique: 
un  texte  de  Flavius  Josephe  qui  appelle  une  remarque  du  roi. 

Ce  decor  est  ouvert.  Ainsi,  a  la  fin  du  livre  I,  la  conversation  est  inter- 
rompue  par  I'arrivee  d'un  importun.  Dans  le  deuxieme  digJogue,  un  troisieme 
personnage  intervient  inopinement  (f°70)  et  accapare  quelque  temps  I'atten- 
tion.  Au  f°  75  enfin,  une  foule  bruyante  entre  brusquement  et  met  defmi- 
tivement  fm  au  dialogue  (strepitum  ingredientis  undae  procerum  clientiumque  eorum). 

L'action  se  passe  entre  1530  et  1532,  c'est-a-dire  au  lendemain  de  I'lnsti- 
tution  des  Lecteurs  Royaux.  Precisons  que  c'est  un  moment  particulierement 
favorable  a  la  cause  de  I'humanisme.  Or  c'est  bien  de  I'humanisme  qu'il  s'agit 
ici.  C'est  lui  qui  est  designe  sous  le  nom  de  Philologie,  ou  encore  sous  celui 
de  bonnes  lettres. 

L'argument: 

Le  De  philologia  est  a  la  fois  louange  de  la  Philologie  et  plaidoyer  en  faveur 
de  la  Philologie.  II  va  de  soi  que  ces  deux  aspects  sont  lies:  on  plaide  la  cause 
de  la  Philologie  parce  qu'elle  en  vaut  la  peine.  .  .  .  Le  mot  "philologie"  doit  s'en- 
tendre  selon  I'etymologie:  amour  du  logos,  lequel  est  a  la  fois 

-  science:    culture  generale,  ou  plutot,  pour  prendre  le  mot  cher  a 

Bude,  culture  encyclopedique.  Bude  s'eleve  violemment 
contre  le  cloisonnement  des  disciplines,  le  morcellement  de 
Yorbis  disciplinarum. 

-  beaute:     c'est-a-dire  eloquence,  comme  manifestation  de  cette  culture 

dans  la  parole  et  dans  I'ecrit. 

Bude  se  fonde,  pour  plaider  la  cause  de  la  Philologie  sur  une  promesse  du 
roi  deja  ancienne.  Certes  il  reconnait  les  progres  accomplis:  la  culture  s'est 
quelque  peu  repandue,  le  roi  vient  de  nommer  des  "lecteurs  royaux,"  et  Bude, 
quant  a  lui,  qui  cumule  desormais  les  charges  de  maitre  de  la  Librairie  et 
de  maitre  des  Requetes,  a  ete  bien  pourvu.  Mais,  precisement  parce  qu'il 
a  ete  "servi,"  il  estime  devoir  desormais  se  consacrer,  de  maniere  desin- 
teressee,  a  servir  la  cause  de  la  "nation  des  lettres."  II  se  veut  I'avocat  de  I'hu- 
manisme, le  patronus  in  universum  ordinis  literarum  (preface,  f°  3).  II  reclame  h. 
ce  titre: 


494  LE   DE  PHILOLOGIA  DE  GUILLAUME  BUDE 

—  que  le  roi  fasse  construire  (en  veillant  peut-etre  meme  personnelle- 
ment  a  son  architecture)  un  museum,^  le  college  de  pierre  qu'il  con- 
vient  d'edifier  pour  la  gloire  des  lettres,  et  pour  la  gloire  perpetuelle 
du  regne. 

—  qu'il  use  de  son  autorite  royale  pour  donner  I'impulsion  decisive  a 
une  veritable  revolution  des  mentalites.  Car  il  en  a  le  pouvoir,  pourvu 
qu'il  veuille  bien  manifester,  en  depit  de  la  resistance  des  gens  en  place 
et  de  la  pesanteur  des  institutions,  sa  faveur  pour  les  hommes  de  science 
et  d'etude.  Bref,  en  France  un  humaniste  n'a  aucun  poids:  c'est  un 
gratte-papier,  un  pauvre  fou,  tout  au  plus  peut-il  pretendre  a  de- 
venir  secretaire  d'un  grand.  Or  il  doit  au  contraire  parvenir  de  plein 
droit  aux  plus  hautes  charges. 

Tel  est  I'argument  qui  se  developpe  en  deux  actes,  ou  plutot  en  deux  "journees." 


Quant  a  I'argumentation,  elle  se  fonde 

A.  sur  des  analyses  sociologiques:  structure  du  systeme  universitaire,  meca- 
nisme  des  nominations  aux  charges  et  offices,  rapports  d'autorite,  dispro- 
portions economiques,  etc. 

B.  sur  la  reference  au  modele  antique: 

-  de  la  science  totale,  la  paideia  (Ciceron,  Quintilien) 

-  de  la  philosophic  comme  science  universelle  (Platon,  Aristote,  Ciceron) 

-  de  I'union  de  I'ethique  et  de  I'esthetique  {vir  bonus  dicendi  peritus) 

C.  sur  le  "vecu"  de  GuUlaume  Bude,  qui  constitue  un  cas  exemplaire  et  est 
devenu  un  double  symbole,  et  comme  pionnier  de  I'humanisme  en  France, 
et  comme  depositaire  de  la  promesse  royaile.  Deux  raisons  pour  evoquer 
le  passe,  soit  pour  prendre  conscience  du  chemin  parcouru  et  du  chemin 
a  parcourir,  soit  pour  incessamment  rappeler  au  roi  ses  engagements. 

Voila  qui  va  affecter,  et  tres  heureusement,  la  structure  du  dialogue. 


Les  effets  de  perspective 

Le  dialogue  se  trouve  varie  par  la  projection  dans  le  tissu  du  discours  pre- 
mier d'une  sorte  de  discours  second  constitue  de  scenes  du  passe,  qui  elles- 
memes  revetent  souvent  la  forme  dialoguee.  Ainsi,  au  bas  du  T  6  v°,  on  pent 
lire:  Memini  vero  quum  ante  aliquot  annos....  Un  recit  commence  et  la  scene  s'a- 
nime.  Bude  venait  tout  juste  d'arriver  a  la  cour.  Voila  que  quelqu'un,  a  la 
table  du  roi,  se  met  a  parler  de  lui  et  a  le  presenter  comme  un  phenomene: 
"jamais  ne  se  reposant,  ne  regardant  jamais  passer  les  gens,  jamEiis  ne  se  pro- 
menant,  etc."  Bref  une  sorte  de  format  heureux  des  lettres!  Le  roi  etonne  se 


MARIE-MADELEINE  DE  LA  GARANDERIE 


495 


tourne  alors  vers  Bude  lui-meme  et  quete  une  reponse.  Bude  confirme,  et 
complete  meme  le  portrait,  racontant  son  histoire  depuis  son  adolescence,  rap- 
pelant  les  efforts  de  son  pere  pour  le  detourner  d'etudes  que  celui-ci  estimait 
nocives  et  pour  sa  fortune  et  pour  sa  sante.  Pour  avoir  persevere  malgre 
tout  peut-etre  a-t-il  ete  sapiens,  mais  il  n'a  certes  pas  ete  prudensl .  .  . 

—  "Vous  souvenez-vous  de  ce  que  j'ai  dit  alors?""  dit  le  roi. 

—  "Oui,"  repond  Bude,  "je  me  souviens  .  .  ."  etc.  Et  Bude  rappelle  la  pro- 
messe  que  le  roi  lui  avait  fait  alors  de  corriger  les  facheux  effets  de  cette  im- 
prudence, sinon  en  ce  qui  concerne  sa  sante,  qui  est  I'affaire  des  medecins, 
du  moins  en  ce  qui  concerne  sa  fortune.^ 

Get  exemple  fait  bien  voir  comment  fonctionne  le  dialogue  passe  dans  le 
dialogue  present:  comme  un  rideau  qui  s'ouvrirait  au  fond  de  la  scene.  II  ne 
serait  pas  vraisemblable  qu'au  premier  niveau  du  discours  Bude  fasse  d'aussi 
longs  recits.  Mais  a  plusieurs  reprises  on  ouvre  le  livre  du  temps.  De  sorte 
qu'un  "Bude  par  lui-meme"  se  trouve  offert,  de  maniere  variee  et  disconti- 
nue, tantot  en  style  direct  (comme  dans  I'exemple  precedent),  tantot  en  style 
mixte  — les  toumures  indirectes  permettant  de  resumer  et  d'ecourter  le 
propos  —  tantot  enfin  par  breves  allusions  (f°  13,  41  v°,  51  v°,  60).  Apres  ce 
qu'on  pourrait  appeler  la  "sequence  de  la  vocation,"  f°  6  v°-8  (qui  se  situe 
vraisemblablement  en  1519,  et  renvoie  aussi  aux  annees  1492-1500),  on  ren- 
contre, dans  I'ordre  du  texte: 

—  Bude  aux  armees  (et  pas  tres  belliqueux!).  En  Belgique  (Tournai),  octo- 
bre  1521:  T  8  v°. 

—  Bude  nomme  maitre  des  Requetes,  et  qui  precisement  au  moment  oia 
le  diplome  lui  est  adresse  a  quitte  la  cour  sans  autorisation  pour  rentrer 
chez  lui.  Mais  il  rejoint  alors  la  cour  a  Blois,  aout  1522:  f  9  et  v°. 

—  Le  souvenir  tout  recent  d'une  conversation  nee  du  commentaire  d'une  lec- 
ture d'histoire  a  la  table  royale:  T  22  v°. 

—  Lors  de  I'entrevue  du  Camp  du  Drap  d'Or  (juin  1520)  Bude  fait  une  bevue 
en  se  melant  etourdiment  de  cosmographie.  Simple  anecdote,  au  reste  fort 
plaisante:  T  29. 

—  Bude  a  la  chasse  avec  le  roi:  f°  45. 

Comme  on  le  voit,  le  discours  ne  se  deroule  pas  sur  un  seul  fil.  C*est  un 
discours  charge  de  souvenirs  (ou  le  mot  memini  revient  constamment).  Par 
la  il  a  ses  assises,  son  relief.  II  ouvre  tout  un  champ  de  conscience,  tout  un 
champ  d'histoire.  Par  quoi  les  personnages  trouvent  consistance,  et  cette  il- 
lusion de  vie  que  Ton  appelle  la  verite  de  I'art. 


496  LE  DE  PHILOLOGIA   DE  GUILLAUME  BUDE 

Les  parleurs:  BUDE 

Que  Bude  soit  son  propre  personnage  n'est  pas  etonnant.  Bude  est  un  au- 
teur  qui  dit  "je."  On  le  voit  dans  le  De  asse  interpeller  son  lecteur,  le  prendre 
a  temoin  des  difficultes  qu'il  rencontre.  A  la  fin  du  meme  ouvrage  il  s'essaie 
au  genre  du  dialogue  en  se  mettant  en  scene,  conversant  avec  son  ami  Fran- 
cois Deloynes.  Dans  le  De  contemptu  rerumfortuitarum,  il  medite  devant  son  frere 
Dreux,  interlocuteur  silencieux.  Bref  Bude  aime  a  se  raconter.  Mais  ce  n'est 
pas  de  I'auteur  qu'il  est  question  ici,  mais  de  Bude-personnage  cette  sorte 
d"'auto-portrait"  de  I'auteur.  Portrait  multiple  en  realite.  Le  personnage  est 
connu  a  la  fois  par  son  comportement  dans  le  dialogue,  et  par  les  scenes  qui 
constituent  le  niveau  second  du  discours. 

Ce  qui  avant  toute  chose  le  caracterise,  c'est  une  passion  indefectible  pour 
les  etudes.  II  se  presente  (f°  25)  comme  I'epoux  de  la  Philologie  (I'image  de 
I'autre  epouse  n'est  evoquee  que  rapidement).  C'est  un  travailleur  forcene 
mais  dont  le  travail  s'accomplit  dans  I'enthousiasme  et  la  joie.  II  a  un  senti- 
ment aigu  de  la  noblesse  de  la  cause  a  laquelle  il  s'est  donne;  il  se  sent  investi 
d'une  mission  nationale.  Ajoutons  qu'il  est  bavard,  ou  tout  au  moins  abon- 
dant,  avec  une  tendance  certaine  au  lyrisme  (tendance  dont  ses  auditeurs  sem- 
blent  parfois  sourire,  quand  il  se  laisse  emporter  intarissablement  dans  quelque 
hymne  a  I'eloquence,  ou  I'eloge  de  son  roi,  ou  la  description  de  scenes  de 
chasse).  C'est  un  esprit  mobile,  observateur  aigu,  voire  aux  aguets.  II  a  de  la 
gaiete,  de  la  jovialite.  Le  roi  I'aime  beaucoup,  I'estime  beaucoup,  I'admire  par- 
fois jusqu'a  remerveillement.  Entre  les  deux  personnages  il  y  a  une  evidente 
connivence. 

LE  ROI 

n'est  pas  seulement  connu  a  travers  ses  dires  et  ses  comportements,  mais  a 
travers  plusieurs  portraits'*  dont  se  trouve  emaille  le  discours  de  Bude.  On 
retiendra  ici  pour  faire  bref,  que  sa  culture  est  limitee,  mais  qu'il  a  une  grande 
ouverture  d'esprit,  de  grands  dons  naturels,  en  particulier  une  merveilleuse 
facilite  de  parole  (facundia),  et  un  jugement  sur.  II  se  fait  aimer  par  sa  fran- 
chise, et  la  tolerance  avec  laquelle  il  sait  accueillir  la  franchise  d'autrui.  On 
vante  sa  clemence,  et  surtout  on  ne  cesse  de  vanter  (et  c'est  de  bonne  politique 
en  pareil  sujet)  sa  fidelite  a  toute  epreuve  a  la  parole  donnee.  II  est  en  societe 
un  convive  aimable,  gai,  a  I'ironie  toujours  bienveillante. 

Le  personnage  du  roi,  il  va  de  soi,  ne  pouvait  etre  que  brillant  et  sympa- 
thique.  Ce  qui  s'accordait  bien  en  somme  a  la  realite,  et  surtout  a  la  sym- 
pathie  personnelle  de  Bude.  Toutefois  — ce  qui  est  plus  remarquable  —  Bude 
reussit  a  faire  I'eloge  du  roi  en  echappant  aux  topos  de  la  litterature  enco- 
miastique.  Et  ceci  grace  a  ce  que  j'appellerais  un  procede  de  diffraction,  c'est-a- 


MARIE-MADELEINE  DE  LA  GARANDERIE  497 

dire  la  fragmentation  des  aspects,  presentes  eux-memes  sous  des  eclairages 
differents  au  gre  du  dialogue.  On  passe  ainsi  comme  devant  une  galerie  de 
portraits  royaux:  en  briUant  autodidacte  (f°  28  v°),  en  aimable  causeur  (f°  23 
v°,  30),  en  magnifique  orateur,  particulierement  doue  pour  les  grands  dis- 
cours  officiels  (f°60  v°);  et  aussi,  au  livre  II,  en  cavalier,  en  chasseur,  etc. 
Enfin  ces  portraits  (par  une  sorte  de  phenomene  de  refraction)  subissent  le  re- 
gard, souvent  sceptique  et  ironique,  du  roi-personnage.  Comme  dans  un  ta- 
bleau ou  Ton  pourrait  voir  a  la  fois  (et  Ton  sait  combien  I'epoque  se  plaisait 
a  ces  sortes  de  virtuosite!)  le  peintre,  ses  tableaux,  son  modele,  et  le  regard 
du  modele  sur  ses  propres  portraits.  Grace  a  ces  efFets  de  diffraction  et  de 
refraction  le  portrait  qui  se  fixera  finalement  dans  I'esprit  du  lecteur  aura  me- 
sure  et  elegance.  II  sera  en  quelque  sorte  "grandeur  nature." 

Les  inter-actions 

Enfm  dans  — et  par  — le  dialogue  ou  ils  sont  engages  les  deux  personnages 
subissent  une  influence  reciproque: 

—  Parlant  avec  le  roi,  Bude  est  amene  a  donner  a  sa  reflexion  un  axe  po- 
litique, profane  (nous  dirions  laique),  alors  que  I'axe  de  sa  pensee  est  plus 
generalement  religieux  (il  se  rattrape  tout  a  loisir  dans  le  De  studio).  Par 
exemple,  c'est  pour  leur  utilite  dans  la  vie  civile  que  sont  vantees  (P  14 
v°)  la  philosophic  antique  et  les  bonae  literae;  la  Phflologie  est  dite  (P  34)  san- 
guis et  succus  civilis  corporis;  et  Ton  insiste  longuement  (pour  regretter  amere- 
ment  que  la  France  en  soit  depourvue^)  sur  I'importance  de  I'Histoire  pour 
perpetuer  la  memoire  des  exploits  et  des  nobles  institutions  (f°  22-24). 

—  L'influence  de  Bude  sur  le  roi  conduit  ce  dernier  a  tenir  a  plusieurs  re- 
prises un  discours  tout  budeien.  Ainsi  apparait-il  convaincu  de  I'enjeu  po- 
litique du  combat  humaniste.  Et  c'est  lui-meme  qui  presente  a  Bude 
I'argument  humaniste  par  excellence:  que  ce  sont  les  ecrivains  qui  consa- 
crent  la  gloire  des  princes  et  de  leurs  hauts  faits  (f°  22  et  v°);  et  qu'ils  ont 
le  pouvoir  d'edifier  pour  les  rois  "des  statues  d'or  et  d'argent"  (P  26  et  v°). 
Un  Bude  tout  politique,  un  roi  humaniste:  ce  n'est  pas  une  controverse, 

mais  c'est  un  duo.  Ou  plutot  c'est  un  jeu. 


LE  DIALOGUE  COMME  JEU  DE  COUR 

Le  De  philologia  depeint  plusieurs  aspects  de  la  vie  de  cour:  tournoi,  chasse 
a  courre,  chasse  au  faucon,  battue  de  sanglier.  Tous  sports  virils.  Mais  il  place 
au  premier  plan  de  celle-ci  le  colloquium,  ou  Ton  traite  de  sujets  serieux,  mais 
avec  amabiliti  et  gaietS. 


498  LE  DE  PHILOLOGIA  DE  GUILLAUME  BUDE 

Et  ce  jeu  a  ses  regies.  Un  arbitre:  le  roi.  Un  parleur:  Bude. 

—  Le  roi  promet  d'etre  attentif  et  meme  bienveillant,  mais  se  reserve  le  droit 
d'interrompre  et  d'interroger  (f°17  v°). 

—  Le  parleur,  Bude,  doit  reussir  son  discours,  c'est-a-dire  ne  pas  broncher 
en  chemin  ou  a  la  fin.  II  dispose  d'un  temps  limite:  distribue  genereuse- 
ment  parce  que  I'arbitre  se  plait  au  jeu,  mais  limite  tout  de  meme  (et  I'al- 
lusion  a  la  clepsydre  revient  constamment).  C'est  dire  que  notre  Bude,  pour 
parler  autant  qu'il  veut,  est  contraint  de  demander  un  supplement  de  temps, 
de  s'excuser,  et  de  ruser.  Dans  ces  conditions  rien  de  plus  important  pour 
lui  que  d'observer  les  reactions  du  roi-arbitre,  de  guetter  les  signes  d'im- 
patience  ou  d'approbation.  Le  roi,  de  son  cote,  s'amuse  a  tenir  un  peu, 
—  et  souplement— ,  la  bride  a  I'orateur  prolixe.  Mais  aussi  il  joue  avec  lui. 

Faisons  maintenant  brievement  I'inventaire  de  ces  jeux. 


Jeux  juridiques: 

a)  Imaginons  que  la  Philologie  vienne  se  plaindre  d'etre  injustement  traitee 
dans  I'Etat.  Que  pourrait  en  sa  faveur  arguer  I'avocat? 

b)  Imaginons  maintenant  que  la  Philologie  soit  une  fiUe  a  doter,  et  que  le  roi 
de  France  accepte  d'etre  son  parrain. 

1°  quel  nom  va-t-on  lui  donner? 

2°  quelqu'un  d'autre  ne  risque-t-il  pas  de  se  presenter  pour  contester  ce  pa- 
tronage? 

3°  Le  roi  de  France  a  deja  des  fiUes.  Celles-ci  ne  risquent-elles  pas  de  pro- 
tester? 
4°  Et  combien  cette  adoption  va-t-elle  couter? 

c)  Guillaume  Bude,  lors  de  sa  nomination  comme  maitre  de  Requetes,  avait 
quitte  la  cour  sans  demander  I'autorisation  royale,  et  etait  retourne  chez 
lui  et  a  ses  cheres  etudes.  A  strictement  parler,  il  a  deserte.  Quels  ar- 
guments peut-il  (dix  ans  apres!)  invoquer  pour  sa  defense? 


Jeux  sur  remblematique  et  la  mythologie: 

oil  Ton  deploie  des  prodiges  d'arguties  pour  I'interpretation  de  mythes  ou  de 
symboles: 

a)  Bude  vient  de  celebrer  Minerve  comme  deesse  de  I'eloquence.  Un  troi- 
sieme  personnage  qui  vient  d'entrer  en  scene  se  plait  alors  a  le  taquiner: 
Minerve  est-elle  une  deesse  guerriere  ou  une  deesse  pacifique?  Ne  file- 
t-elle  pas  la  laine  au  foyer  comme  Penelope.  On  s'empetre  alors  plaisam- 
ment  dans  I'interpretation  des  mythes  de  Penelope,  Ulysse,  etc.  (P  68  ss). 

b)  Les  empereurs  romains  portaient  toujours  avec  eux  une  statue,  en  or,  de 


MARIE-MADELEINE  DE   LA  GARANDERIE  499 

la  fortune  {fortuna  aurea).  Les  rois  de  France  en  faisaient  autant;  cette  sta- 
tue symbolisait  leur  pouvoir  de  conferer  la  fortune,  mais  la  representation 
populaire  est  celle  d'une  deesse  aveugle.  Etait-elle  aveugle  ou  non,  la  "for- 
tune" des  rois?  (r  26) 

Le  jeu  de  construction,  ou  Fexplosion  du  discours 

Tous  les  jeux  que  nous  venons  d'enumerer  sont  jeux  de  langage  mais  fonc- 
tionnent  sur  une  thematique.  Mais  il  arrive  que  le  langage  prenne  totalement 
I'initiative.  La  merveille  a  cet  egard  est  le  Heme  Livre,  ou  des  fleuves  d'elo- 
quence  sortent  de  I'emploi  inattendu  d'un  mot,  le  mot  f era.  C'est  au  P  41  v°. 
Bude  vient  d'evoquer,  en  des  termes  analogues  a  ceux  de  Rabelais  dans  la 
celebre  lettre  de  Gargantua  a  Pantagruel,^  I'immense  difference  entre  les 
conditions  de  I'etude  en  son  temps  (celui  des  "pionniers")  et  celles  qui  s'offrent 
desormais  aux  jeunes  gens.  Dans  son  elan,  il  termine  ainsi,  parlant  des  progres 
de  la  connaissance  du  grec: 

(...)  tant  il  est  vrai  qu'il  n'y  a  rien  d'aussi  sauvage  qui  ne  vienne  a  s'a- 
doucir  quand  on  s'y  attache  longtemps  {adeo  tarn  nihil  ferum  est,  quin  diu 
tractando  discat  mansuescere) . 

Oq,  Jerum  est  aussitot  releve  par  le  roi: 

Vous  n'appelez  tout  de  meme  pas  'sauvage'  la  science  du  grec! 

Et  Bude  se  corrige  {id  verbum  temere  mihi  ore  occidit).  Mais  le  jeu  est  parti.  Cette 
fera,  cette  sauvage  (cette  bete  sauvage?),  cette  sauvageonne,  "fuyante,  trom- 
peuse,  glissante  sous  mes  prises  (fera  fugax,  fallax,  lubrica),"  dit-il  (P  42  v°), 
s'est  derobee  aussi  longuement  a  moi  que  les  cerfs  qui  vous  entrainent  et  em- 
barrassent  en  de  longs  detours  quand  vous  les  pourchassez  a  la  chasse." 

C'est  ainsi  que  Ton  se  met  a  parler  de  la  chasse,  et  de  maniere  si  etendue 
que  Louis  Le  Roy,  le  biographe  de  Guillaume  Bude  traduira  en  frangais  ces 
pages  en  les  presentant  comme  un  Traite  de  Venerie.^ 

Parler  de  la  chasse  plait  evidemment  au  roi.  Mais  la  langue  latine  sera- 
t-elle  capable  d'exprimer  ces  realites  typiquement  contemporaines  et  fran- 
gaises?  Essayons  toutefois!  Parlons  d'abord  de  la  chasse  a  courre  (f  43-48). 
Quand  Bude  acheve  la  description,  et  que  le  cerf  est  cerne  par  "toute  la  meute 
de  Diane,  ce  qui  est  la  fm  de  la  partie"  (f°  48),  le  roi  se  desole  d'une  fin  si 
brusque: 

C'est  ici,  c'est  ici  qu'il  faut  poursuivre.  Vous  avez  laisse  trop  rapidement 
la  bete  comme  epuisee  et  sans  vie!  Mais  il  lui  reste  peut-etre  encore 
beaucoup  de  vie  pour  reprendre  sa  course.  Continuez  done  a  la  presser 
avant  qu'elle  ne  reprenne  tout  a  fait  ses  forces  et  ne  nous  donne  de  nou- 
velles  peines! 


500  LE  DE  PHILOLOGIA  DE  GUILLAUME  BUDE 

Comme  on  le  voit,  le  roi  est  pris  au  jeu.  II  ne  veut  pas  voir  trop  vite  la  fm 
.  .  .  du  feuilleton. 

Ce  sont  alors,  de  la  part  de  Bude,  des  exercices  de  haute  virtuosite.  II  se 
lance  dans  la  description  de  la  chasse,  explorant  successivement  les  differents 
aspects  de  ce  sport  a  la  mode,  sport  royal  et  frangais  par  excellence.  Sa  reus- 
site  ne  consiste  pas  seulement  dans  le  rythme,  le  mouvement,  la  variete  de 
ces  tableaux  (ou,  pourrait-on  dire,  de  ces  films).  Elle  est  plus  encore  dans  le 
fait  d'avoir  accompli  cette  prouesse  en  latin,  et  d'avoir  ainsi  fait  la  preuve  que 
la  langue  latine  est  une  langue  vivante,  pourvu  que  I'ecrivain  veuille  la  "for- 
cer" comme  le  chasseur  force  la  bete  (la/^ra),  cerf  ou  sanglier. 

Car  I'humanisme  aussi  est  une  chasse,  une  investigatio.  Ce  qui  permet  a  Bude 
d'"allegoriser,"  et  de  jouer  a  la  fois  sur  les  deux  registres.  A  propos  de  la  bat- 
tue de  sanglier  (f  45),  il  ecrit:  in  aprorum  lustra  pedem  omnino  non  inferam,  ne  al- 
tius  in  luto  haeream.  Ce  qui  revient  a  dire  qu'il  craint  de  s'engager  dans  une  telle 
description,  de  crainte  de  s'embourber  .  .  .  faute  de  vocabulaire.  Mais,  hors 
cette  reserve  passagere,  c'est  I'optimisme  et  I'audace  qui  I'emportent.  C'est  ainsi 
que  le  De  philologia  contient  une  veritable  "defense  et  illustration  de  la  langue 
latine."^  Bude  poursuit  metaphoriquement  sa  chasse  du  langage  dans  I'alle- 
gresse  des  chasses  royales,  et  sans  doute  le  souvenir  de  celles  de  sa  jeunesse. 
Quand,  dans  la  derniere  partie  du  second  dialogue  (f°  62  ss),  il  revient  sur 
le  theme  central  de  son  livre  et  entonne  I'hymne  a  I'eloquence,  c'est  avec  ce 
vocabulaire  de  la  chasse,  qu'il  vient  tout  juste  de  "roder"  {venator,  indagator,  in- 
vestigator, indices,  etc.),  qu'il  traite  des  parties  de  I'art  oratoire,  et  en  particulier 
de  I'invention. 

*  *  * 

En  fm  de  compte  Bude  I'orateur  aura  parle  de  la  chasse. 
Le  roi,  chasseur  aura  parle  des  lettres.  L'echange  des  roles  apparait  ainsi 
comme  la  forme  supreme  du  jeu. 

Cet  echange  de  roles  est  evidemment  le  fruit  de  la  connivence  entre  les 
deux  personnages.  On  a  I'impression  en  lisant  ces  dialogues  que  les  interlo- 
cuteurs  se  sont  eleves  a  un  niveau  d'intelligence  tel  qu'il  autorise  entre  eux 
la  plus  grande  liberte  de  pensee  et  de  propos.  ^^  Au  f°  28  v°,  le  roi,  parlant 
du  plaisir  qu'il  eprouve  a  se  meler  aux  conversations  des  savants  declare: 

Quand  il  m'arrive  de  le  faire,  c'est  comme  lorsque  des  gens  de  passage, 
amateurs  de  musique,  mais  sans  formation,  se  presentent  avec  respect 
(.  .  .)  au  milieu  des  concerts  et  se  melent  aux  chants.  C'est  ainsi  que  je 
me  joins  parfois  (je  ne  sais  si  je  le  fais  bien)  a  ceux  qui  parlent  des  scien- 
ces (.  .  .).  II  me  plait  aussi  bien  souvent  de  servir  de  pierre  a  aiguiser 
ou  de  diapason,  et  d'exciter,  en  les  harcelant,  ceux  qui  discutent. 

La  pierre  a  aiguiser,  la  cotis,  c'est  en  fait  le  genre  meme  du  dialogue  avec  ses 
strategies  et  ses  jeux.  Dans  ces  dialogues  brillants  —  hymnes  au  langage,  jeux 
de  langage,  fetes  du  langage  —  s'aiguise  une  parole  creatrice,  et  s'aiguise  aussi 


MARIE-MADELEINE   DE   LA  GARANDERIE  5OI 

une  langue  latine  eclatante  et  neuve.  II  n'est  pas  excessif  de  conclure  que  le 
De  philologia  est  un  joyau  du  neo-latin. 


Notes 


1.  La  foliotation  renvoie  a  Tedition  de  1532.  Reprint  Friedrich  Frommann  Verlag, 
Stuttgart,  1964. 

2.  Cette  demande  avait  ete  expressement  formulee  dans  la  preface  grecque  (tra- 
duite  evidemment  en  frangais  a  I'intention  du  roi)  des  Commentarii  linguae  graecae  (1529). 
Cf.  M-M.  de  La  Garanderie,  "Rabelais  et  Bude,"  in  Melanges  a  la  memoire  de  Franco 
Simone,  Geneve,  Slatkine,  1983,  t.IV,  p.  163.  L'institution  des  Lecteurs  Royaux  ne 
representait  pour  Bude  qu'un  premier  pas  vers  la  fondation  d'un  veritable  college: 
cf.  f  13,  31  v°  -  34  v°,  65. 

3.  Promesse  que  realisera  la  double  nomination  aux  fonctions  de  maitre  de  la  Li- 
brairie,  et  de  maitre  des  Requetes  de  I'Hotel,  en  1522. 

4.  Le  premeir  de  ces  portraits  est  celui  qu'esquisse  Bude  — auteur  dans  sa  preface, 
au  f*'  2  v°:  uberrima  naturae  dote  praeditum  ipsum  esse  noveram,  atque  beatissima,  simul  erudi- 
tionis  germanae  et  antiquae  admiratione  non  vulgari,  quasi  naturae  sponte  magistroque  imbutum. 

5.  On  ne  pent  qu'etre  frappe  du  mepris  radical  dont  temoigne  Bude  a  I'egard 
des  historiens  Gallici  nominis.  Leurs  recits  sont  a  ses  yeux  (mais  il  ne  nomme  personne) 
nugae,  mythistoriae,  fabulae  qui  ne  sauraient  retenir  I'attention  des  lettres:  f**  22  v°  -  23  v°. 

6.  La  source  du  passage  est  VHistoire  Auguste,  notamment  dans  les  vies  d'Antonin, 
XII,  5-6;  de  Marc  Aurele,  VII,  3;  Sulp.  Severe,  XXIII,  5,  et  Elagabal,  XXIV,  4. 
Je  dois  ces  precisions  a  M.  James  Hirstein  (I'editeur  de  la  Preface  d'Erasme  a  Sue- 
tone  et  a  I'H.A.),  et  le  prie  de  trouver  ici  mes  remerciements. 

7.  Cf.  art.  cite  supra  p.  162  et  notes  31  et  32. 

8.  La  traduction  aurait  ete  faite  a  la  demande  de  Charles  IX  en  1572.  Elle  ne  fut 
publiee  qu'en  1861,  par  Henry  Chevreul  (Paris,  Ste  des  Bibliophiles  frangais,  n°16). 
Dans  ce  decoupage  du  livre  la  coherence  disparait  et  les  developpements  sur  I'elo- 
quence  semblent  des  digressions. 

9.  Cf.  r  45  v°,  48  v°,  51  v°.  Bude  s'inscrit  si  fortement  dans  la  latinite  qu'il  peut, 
au  r'  15  v°  pzirler  de  Ciceron  comme  d'un  "compatriote":  Marcus  ille  Tullius  eloquentiae 
non  tarn  parens  ut  appellatur,  quamfilius  et  alumnus,  ac  pene  Graecorum  gloriae  haeres  apus  nos 
solus  relictus.  De  meme,  dans  le  De  studio,  f  24  v°,  il  appelle  Virgile  Homerus  noster. 

10.  Dans  cette  sphere  privilegiee,  sorte  de  paradis  de  I'elegance  d'esprit  et  de  I'in- 
telligence,  on  est  bien  loin  de  la  machine  redoutable  qui  broie  les  Berquin  et  les  Dolet. 


Artes  dictandi  und  erasmische  Theorie 
in  More's  lateinischen  Briefen 

Hubertus  Schulte  Herbruggen 

Mores  Korrespondenz 

Unter  den  Briefsammlungen  der  Renaissance-Humanisten  nimmt  die 
Korrespondenz  Sir  Thomas  Mores  nach  ihrem  erhaltenen  Umfang 
einen  bescheidenen,  ihrem  Gewicht  nach  jedoch  einen  bedeutenden 
Platz  ein. 

Was  ist  uns  erhalten?  Die  kritische  Ausgabe  von  Elizabeth  Frances  Rogers, 
The  Correspondence  of  Sir  Thomas  More,^  prasentiert  219  Briefe,  138  von  More 
und  70  an  ihn.  10  Briefe  von  und  an  andere  Familienangehorige  (und  einen 
irrtiimlich  aufgenommenen  Brief  des  Erasmus  an  Desiderius  MoreUus,  R.  190). 
Einen  zusatzlichen  Brief  (R.  195)  legte  Miss  Rogers  in  Selected  Letters  vor.^ 
Hinzu  kommen  vier  Briefe  von  und  18  Briefe  an  More,  die  ich  in  Sir  Thomas 
More:  Neue  Briefe^  und  in  der  Zeitschrift  Moreana  1967  und  1983  ediert  habe.* 
Weitere  36  von  mir  gefundene  Briefe  (3  von  More  und  33  an  ihn)  liegen  fertig 
ediert  bereit  und  bringen  die  Gesamtzahl  auf  etwa^  270,  etwa  147  Briefe  von 
ihm  und  111  an  ihn  gerichtete.^  Nach  derzeitigem  Stand  ist  das  Korpus  der 
Morus-Korrespondenz  somit  um  knapp  ein  Drittel  grofier  als  in  der  Rogers- 
Edition. 

Dennoch  nimmt  sich  im  Vergleich  zu  seinen  Zeitgenossen  Mores  Korres- 
pondenz mit  270  Briefen  bescheiden  aus.''  Der  Hauptgrund  dafur,  dafi  uns 
nur  so  wenig  verbUeben  ist,  liegt  in  der  Konfiskation  seines  Gesamtvermo- 
gens  nach  Mores  Ehrloserklarung  {Attainder).^  Heinrichs  und  Cromwells 
Hascher  werden  es  besonders  auf  Mores  Korrespondenz  abgesehen  haben, 
hoffend,  darin  fiir  den  bevorstehenden  "Hochverratsprozefi"  belastendes  Ma- 
terial gegen  ihn  aufzustobern.  Sie  fanden  offensichtlich  nichts,  denn  im  Pro- 
zefi  ist  kein  derartiger  Brief  vorgelegt  worden.^ 

Mores  Korrespondenz  enthalt  fast  alle  Briefgattungen:  Familien-  und 
Freundschaftsbriefe  wie  amtliche  Schreiben,  Bitt-,  Empfehlungs-  und  Trost- 
briefe  ebenso  wie  solche  der  darstellenden  oder  erorternden  Gattung, 
Gliickwiinsche  und  Danksagungen  wie  Auftrage,  Forderungen  und  Vorwiirfe, 
personlichste  Privatbriefe  wie  Schreiben  in  direktem  Auftrag  des  Konigs.  Die 


504  ARTES   DICTANDI  UND  ERASMISCHE  THEORIE 

Zeitspanne  der  uns  erhaltenen  Stiicke  geht  von  etwa  1501  bis  1535,  deckt  somit 
praktisch  sein  gesamtes  Erwachsenenleben  und  reicht  von  den  friihen  Tagen 
seiner  humanistischen  Zeit  bis  zum  Vorabend  seines  Marty riums.  Von  den 
rund  147  erhaltenen  Briefen  Mores  sind  knapp  zwei  Drittel  in  lateinischer, 
ein  Drittel  in  englischer  und  einer  in  franzosischer  Sprache  geschrieben. 

Die  moderne  Spontaneitat  des  Briefschreibens  darf  nicht  dariiber  hinweg- 
tauschen,  dafi  das  literarische  Erzeugnis  Brief  per  se  von  ungewohnlich  festen 
Formal strukturen  getragen  wird,  die  erst  relativ  spat  in  den  Blickkreis  lite- 
rarischer  Forschung  getreten  sind.  Schon  die  altesten  iiberlieferten  Briefzeug- 
nisse  der  Menschheitsgeschichte,  mesopotamische  Tontafelchen  in  Keilschrift 
der  Hammurabi-Zeit  (um  2000  v.Chr.),  verraten  mit  ihren  Formalteilen  von 
Anrede,  Grufi  mit  Segensformel  und  Briefkorpus  bereits  eine  feste,  von  Herr- 
scherkanzleien  gepragte  Form.^^  Solch  feste  Kanzleiregeln  fanden  Eingang  in 
die  Briefpraxis  des  Romischen  Reiches.  Fiir  die  wiederkehrenden  politischen, 
rechtlichen  und  sachlichen  Situationen  der  Verwaltungspraxis  wurden  feste  For- 
mulare  entworfen,  in  die  nur  die  jeweiligen  Spezifika  einzufiigen  waren.  Vom 
romischen  Kaiserhof  gelangte  diese  Praxis  an  die  papstliche  Kurie,  deren 
Muster  die  bischoflichen  "Kapellen"^^  und  die  weltlichen  Staatskanzleien 
adaptierten.^^  Dies  erklart,  wenn  etwa  die  mehr  als  50  Schreiben  Heinrichs 
VIII.  an  More  durchweg  so  festen  lateinischen  Kanzleimustern  folgen,  dafi 
sie  bisweilen  gar  die  Rekonstruktion  des  Wortlauts  verlorener  Brieftexte  er- 
lauben. 


Artes  dictandi^^ 

Angesichts  solcher  Formkonstanz  des  Briefes  ist  auch  Mores  Korrespon- 
denz  im  Lichte  der  Gattungstradition  zu  sehen.  Sprachlich  wie  literarisch  steht 
More  in  der  lateinischen  Tradition  der  romischen  Kirche,  die  als  eigentliche 
Nachfolgerin  des  universalen  romischen  Reiches  die  unterschiedlichen  Na- 
tionen  der  westlichen  Christenheit  durch  das  Band  der  lateinischen  Sprache 
(der  lingua  franca  der  Gebildeten  Europas)  liturgisch,  administrativ,  judizial  wie 
in  allgemeiner  Bildung  zu  einen  verstand  und  in  Wort,  vor  allem  aber  in  la- 
teinischer Schrift  kulturell  miteinander  verband.  Nach  spatantikem  Vorbild 
hielten  die  mittelalterlichen  Fiirsten  sich  einen  des  (lateinischen)  Briefschrei- 
bens kundigen  "Pfaffen"  fiir  ihre  Hofkapelle,  und  der  geistliche  clericus  war  als 
dictator  der  Vater  des  Laien-Schreibers,  des  clerk}^  Dieser  kulturpolitisch  be- 
deutsame  Ubergang,  Teil  eines  noch  iiber  Jahrunderte  anwahrenden 
Sakularisierungsprozesses,  vollzog  sich  mit  Anbruch  der  Moderne,  d.h.  zu 
Mores  Zeiten,  und  More  selbst  (ibernahm  darin  eine  gewichtige  Rolle,  da  er 
als  Laie  immer  wieder  geistlichen  Amtsvorgangern  folgte:  als  koniglicher 
Sekretar  (Pace,  Ruthall),  als  Delegationsleiter  (Tunstall,  Wolsey)  wie  spater 
Ells  Lordkanzler  (Morton,  Warham,  Wolsey). 


HUBERTUS  SCHULTE  HERBRUGGEN  505 

In  ihrer  rhetorisierten  Sprache  fiigen  sich  Mores  Briefe  auch  literarhisto- 
rischjener  gelehrten  lateinisch-mittelalterlichen  Tradition  ein,  die  in  den  Artes 
dictandi  oder  dictaminis  ihren  international  verbreiteten  und  iiber  die  Jahrhun- 
derte  hinweg  gepflegten  Ausdruck  fand.  Kern  dieser  ars  ist  seit  Alberich  von 
Montecassino  (um  1075)*^  die  Lehre  von  den  fiinf  (oder  siche^n)  partes  episto- 
lae.  Danach  hatte  der  Brief,  wie  seit  alters,  mit  der  salutatio  zu  beginnen,  die 
in  der  dritten  Person  die  Namen  des  Absenders  und  des  Empfangers  mitei- 
nander  verband  und  deren  Form  durch  das  gesellschaftliche  Rangverhatnis 
des  Korrespondenten  zueinander  bestimmte.  Unter  sozial  Gleichgestellten  heifit 
es  schlicht:  "Thomas  Morus  Johanni  Holto  salutem"  (R.2).  Der  noch  relativ 
junge  More  beginnt  den  Grufi  in  seiner  Widmung  der  Dialoge  Lukians^^  an 
den  koniglichen  Sekretar  Heinrichs  VII.  mit  einer  Verbeugung:  "Ornatissimo 
doctissimoque  viro  Thomae  Ruthalo,  regio  apud  Anglos  secretario,  Thomas 
Morus  S.P.D."  (R.5).  An  Heinrich  VIII.  lautet  Mores  devote  Anrede:  "Tho- 
mas Morus  potentissimo  Britanniae  Galliaeque  regi  Henrico  VIII°  foelicis- 
simo,  S.D."  (R.6).  Im  internationalen  diplomatischen  Verkehr  schliefilich  ist 
der  Grufi  zur  festen  Floskel  erstarrt: 

Vniuersis  et  singulis  ad  quorum  noticias  presentes  litere  peruenerint  Nos 
NN  serenissimi  principis  Henrici  octaui  Dei  gratia  Angliae  et  Franciae 
regis,  Fidei  Defensoris,  et  domini  Hiberniae,  consiliarij  oratores,  am- 
bassatores,  nuntii,  procuratores  et  comissarij  Salutem  (NB  172^). 

Der  salutatio  folgt  als  zweites  die  oft  schon  im  Hinblick  auf  den  eigentlichen 
Briefzweck  gestaltete  captatio  benevolentiae .  Ein  Absender  und  Empfanger  kunst- 
voU  miteinander  verkniipfendes  Beispiel  fmdet  sich  Mores  Brief  an  Dorp: 

Si  mihi  ad  te  venire  tam  esset  liberum,  quam  vehementer,  mi  Dorpi, 
cupio,  tum  ista  quae  nunc  parum  commode  committo  litteris,  commo- 
dius  tecum  coram  ipse  tractarem,  tum  quo  mihi  iucundius  potuisset  ac- 
cidere,  teipso  interea  praesens  praesente  perfruerer,  cuius  videndi, 
cognoscendi,  complectendique,  mirum  pectori  meo  desiderium  inseuit 
Erasmus,  nostrum  amantissimus,  tum  utrique  (vti  spero)  ex  aequo  charus. 
(R.  15) 

Zum  Hauptteil  des  Briefes  zahlen  narratio  und  petitio,  beide  konnen  sich  auf 
eine  Sache  oder  auf  zwei  oder  mehrere  Gegenstande  beziehen.  Fiir  die  nar- 
ratio multiplex  liefert  Mores  Brief  an  einen  ungenannten  Monch'^  umfassende 
Beispiele,  in  dem  More  eingangs  den  an  ihn  gerichteten  Brief  des  Monchs 
so  genau  referiert,  dafi  wir  zugleich  in  dessen  verlorenem  Schreiben  noch  die 
Folge  von  captatio  benevolentiae,  narratio  und  petitio  erkennen  konnen.  Ist  dieser 
vierzig  Seiten  lange  Brief  (R. 83)  ein  Beispiel  fiir  die  narratio  multiplex,  so  mag 
der  Brief,  mit  dem  More  Heinrich  VIII.  zur  Thronbesteigung  gratuliert,  als 
Beispiel  fiir  eine  narratio  simplex  dienen,  die  zugleich  elegant  narratio  (Begriin- 


506  ARTES  DICTANDI   UND   ERASMISCHE  THEORIE 

dung  fiir  verspatetes  Uberreichen)  und  petitio  (Bitte  um  giinstige  Aufnahme 
seiner  Verse)  miteinander  verbindet: 

Meum  vero  ab  hoc  vitio  vendicat  immensa  ilia  de  celebri  coronatione 
tua  letitia:  quae  quum  pectoribus  omnium  tarn  efficacem  sui  vim  atque 
praesentiam  impresserit,  ut  senescere  vel  Integra  aetate  non  possit,  ef- 
fecit  nimirum,  ut  hoc  meum  officium  non  sero  re  peracta  atque  euanida, 
sed  praesens  in  rem  praesentem  pervenisse  videatur.(R.  6) 

Die  conclusio  schliefilich  enthielt  die  eschatokollarischen  Schlufiformeln.  Hier- 
zu  gehoren:  die  corroboratio  (Siegel-  und  Unterzeichnungsvermerk),  etwa:  "In 
quorum  omnium  et  singulorum  fidem  et  testimonium  Nos  prefati  procuratores 
praesentes  literas  nostras  magnis  sigillis  nostris  sigillavimus  /  et  manibus  no- 
stris  subscripsimus"  (NB  172"^);  ferner  die  rhetorische  Abschiedsformel  oder 
apprecatio,  die  More  gelegentlich  in  knappest  moglicher  Weise  in  einem  Wort 
zusammenfafit:  "Vale"  (R.  80  an  Goclenius);  ferner  die  adjectio  loci  et  temporis, 
von  More  zum  Leidwesen  seiner  Editoren  oftmals  ganz  fortgelassen  oder  nur 
in  kryptischer  Kurzform  angegeben,  wie  etwa:  "Raptim  Londini  3^  Septem- 
bris"  (R.  20/A.461);  und  schliefilich  die  subscriptio,  zu  der  aufier  der  eigentlichen 
Unterschrift  auch  die  voraufgehende  significatio  affectus  gehort:  "Vale,  Erasme 
dulcissime  mihique  oculis  charior."  (R.  26/A.481),  oder  in  seinem  Abschieds- 
brief  aus  dem  Tower  an  Bonvisi:  "Thomas  Morus,  frustra  fecero  si  adiiciam 
Tuus  .  .  ."(R-  217). 


Antike  Einfliisse 

More  ware  kein  Kind  der  Renaissance,  kein  Humanist  von  Weltrang, 
voUzoge  sich  sein  literarisches  Schaffen  allein  in  den  Geleisen  des  Mittelal- 
ters.  In  seiner  Dissertation^^  hat  Uwe  Baumann  unlangst  mit  Recht  darauf 
hingewiesen,  dafi  neben  der  mittelalterlichen  Tradition  die  Einfliisse  der  An- 
tike nicht  iibersehen  werden  diirfen,  wenngleich  die  Antike  selbst  keine  festen, 
obligatorischen  Regeln  fiir  das  Verfassen  von  Briefen  festgelegt  hat  und  die 
antike  Praxis  sich  mehr  an  der  imitatio  von  Musterbriefen  schulte.  Vereinzelt 
steigern  antike  Briefsteller  ihre  Reflexionen  zu  theoretisierenden  Beobachtun- 
gen.^^  In  wesentlichen  Punkten  stimmen  sie  iiberein:  so  im  Ideal  von  brevitas 
und  luciditas,  in  der  Forderung  nach  einer  Stillage  zwischen  gehobener  Rede 
und  Konversation,  nach  sprachlicher  Eleganz  ohne  syntaktische  L2ingperioden, 
gekiinstelte  Figuren,  hergesuchte  Worter  und  unangemessene  Gelehrtheit. 
Empfohlen  wird  das  Einflechten  von  Sprichwortern  und,  im  Sich-Aufiern  der 
eigenen  Personlichkeit  des  Schreibers  wie  im  Eingehen  auf  die  Eigenart  des 
Empfangers,  ein  Anpassen  des  Briefes  an  die  jeweils  gegebene  Situation. 

Als  Hauptcharakteristika  fiir  die  Antike  darf  dabei  gelten,  den  Brief  als  Aus- 
druck  freundschaftlicher  Verbundenheit  zwischen  Getrennten,     als  "Seelen- 


HUBERTUS   SCHULTE  HERBRUGGEN  507 

bild"  (eixcbv  c|)uxfi?)^^  und  als  Fortsetzung  des  personlichen  Gesprachs^^  zu 
sehen.  Baumann  hat  gezeigt,  dafi  dies  praktisch  fiir  alle  Humanistenbriefe 
Mores^^  und  fiir  viele  seiner  Familienbriefe^'^  gilt.  Dem  entsprechen  die  von 
ihm  benannten  epistolographischen  topoi,  etwa  die  Bitte  um  weitere  Briefe,^^ 
der  Ausdruck  der  Freude  iiber  den  Empfang  eines  Briefes,^^  die  Vertiefung 
dieser  Freude  durch  erneutes  Lesen  oder  Vorlesen,^^  durch  Vorstellung  der 
Gegenwart  des  Schreibenden.^^  Sie  liefien  sich  durch  weitere  erganzen,  etwa 
durch  die  Ungeduld  beim  Warten  auf  einen  lange  ersehnten  Brief, ^^  durch 
Unwillen  iiber  den  nachlassigen  Briefboten,^^  wenngleich  bei  dem  kiihlen 
Englander  More  durch  Verwiinschungen  des  Boten  auch  nicht  so  emphatisch 
gesteigert  wie  bei  Erasmus. ^^  Auch  Baumanns  Beispiele  Uefien  sich  erganzen. 
So  wird  etwa  berichtet,  Mores  Famihe  habe  die  mit  Holzkohle  auf  Papierfet- 
zen  gekritzelten  Briefe  aus  dem  Tower  so  oft  gelesen,  dafi  die  verblassende 
Schrift  mit  Tinte  nachgezogen  werden  mufite  und  das  Papier  schUefiUch  durch 
immer  wiederholtes  pietatvoUes  In-die-Hand-Nehmen  zugrundeging.^^ 

Reich  vertreten  in  Mores  Briefen  sind  Zitate  fremder  Autoren,  an  der  Spitze 
iiber  zweihundert  Zitate  aus  der  HI.  Schrift^^  und  iiber  einhundertfiinfzig 
Sprichworter;^*  daneben  stehen  Zitate  aus  den  Kirchenvatern  wie  der  anti- 
ken  Mythologie  oder  Erwahnungen  antiker  Schriftsteller  wie  Vergil,  Ovid, 
Terenz,  Horaz,  Juvenal  und  Plautus.^^  Vor  allem  Ciceros  Briefsammlungen 
dienten  More  dabei  als  Quelle  seiner  Kenntnisse  wie  als  Muster  zur  Nachah- 

36 

mung. 


Erasmische  Brieftheorie 

Zweimal  nimmt  Erasmus  in  seiner  Korrespondenz  zur  humanistischen  Epi- 
stolographie  Stellung,  und  in  beiden  Fallen  sind  seine  Adressaten  Englan- 
der.^'' Fiir  sie  hat  er  auch  seine  beiden  brieftheoretischen  Werke  verfafit,  fiir 
Robert  Fisher  um  1495  noch  in  Paris  seine  Brevissima  maximeque  compendiaria 
conficiendarum  epistolarumformula^^  und  fiir  Lord  Mountjoy  sein  grofies  Opus  de 
conscribendis  epistolis,^^  an  dem  er  seit  1498  weit  mehr  als  ein  Jahrzehnt  gear- 
beitet  hatte  und  das  1521  zuerst  als  Raubdruck  John  Siberchs  (Johann  von 
Siegburgs)  in  Cambridge,  im  August  1522  dann  autorisiert  und  in  seinem  vol- 
len  Umfang  durch  Froben  in  Basel  im  Druck  erschien.*^ 

Angesichts  der  engen  Verkniipfung  der  brieftheoretischen  Bemiihungen  des 
Erasmus  mit  England  liegt  die  Frage  nahe,  ob  und  wie  die  Briefpraxis  seines 
engsten  englischen  Freundes,  Thomas  More,  im  Ideenkreis  der  erasmischen 
epistolographischen  Theorie  zu  sehen  sei.  Das  relativ  spate  Erschetnungsdatum 
(1521/2)  mochte  dies  auf  den  ersten  Blick  eher  einschranken,  datiert  doch  fast 
die  Halfte  der  uns  erhaltenen  Korrespondenz  mit  More  vor  dieser  Zeit.  An- 
dererseits  ware  es  aufierst  unwahrscheinlich,  wenn  angesichts  des  ungewohn- 
lich  engen  personlichen  wie  brieflichen  Kontaktes  zwischen  More  und  Erasmus, 


508  ARTES  DICTANDI   UND  ERASMISCHE  THEORIE 

dem  humanistischen  Zwillingspaar,  das  bereits  seit  iiber  zwei  Dezennien  in 
engster  Freundschaft  verbunden  war,'^^  das  bereits  so  viele  Briefe  miteinander 
getauscht/^  das  gemeinsam  Texte  der  Klassiker  studiert*^  und  die  Antike  sich 
zum  Vorbild  fiir  das  eigene  literarische  Schaffen  erwahlt  hatte,*^  nicht  auch 
die  Epistolographie  Gegenstand  ihres  geistigen  Austauschs  gewesen  ware, 
zumal  die  sechs  Englandaufenthalte  des  Rotterdamers,  bei  denen  er  immer 
wieder  im  Hause  Mores  gewohnt  oder  ihn  besucht  hatte,  allesamt  vor  diesem 
Datum  liegen. 

Es  ist  hier  weder  der  Ort,  die  Brieftheorie  des  Erasmus  zu  explizieren,  noch 
in  eine  Detailerorterung  der  gedanklichen  Ahnlichkeiten,  Anspielungen  oder 
Einfliisse  einzutreten.  Drei  kurze  Beispiele  miissen  hier  geniigen. 

Wollte  man  die  Hauptcharakteristika  der  erasmischen  Theorie  auf  eine  Kurz- 
formel  bringen,  so  ware  es  wohl  am  ehesten  seine  Ablehung  schulmeisterlicher 
Enge  und  Regelstarre  und  sein  Vorstellen  antik-klassischer  Modelle  zur  imi- 
tatio.  Der  allzu  magisterhaften  Betonung  des  zwolfzeiligen  brevitas-ld^diXs,  (das 
hiefie,  "si  infantis  fasciolas  calceolosque  Herculi  coneris  accomodare";  Oo,  212) 
stellt  Erasmus,  auf  antike  Vorbilder  verweisend,  die  Freiheit  des  Autors  ent- 
gegen,  den  Umfang  des  Briefes  gemafi  seinem  Gegenstande  frei  zu 
bestimmen  —  und  sollte  ein  Buch  daraus  werden:  "(epistola)  ad  temporis,  rerum, 
personarumque  praesentem  rationem,  quantum  licet,  est  accomodanda.  Volu- 
men  quoniam  omnibus  scribitur,  ita  temperandum  est,  vt  optimis  doctissimis 
placeat"  (Oo,  213). 

More  macht  von  dieser  "erasmischen"  Freiheit  der  Brieflange  vollen  Ge- 
brauch.  Drei  seiner  Briefe*^  sind  iiber  vierzig,  zwei"^^  iiber  zwanzig  Drucksei- 
ten  lang,  wobei  die  beiden  ersten  Langbriefe  in  Verteidigung  der  Schriften  des 
Erasmus  geschrieben  sind  und  More  iiber  seine  Kontroverse  mit  Brie'*^  ein- 
gehend  mit  Erasmus  korrespondiert  hat.  Alle  diese  Briefessays  zahlen  zur  Gat- 
tung  des  Erorterungsbriefes  {genus  disputatoriae),  dem  Erasmus  voile  Freiheit 
einraumt:  "Huius  generis,  quoniam  varium  est,  certa  ratio  reddi  non  potest" 
(Oo,  578). 

Ein  anderes  Beispiel.  Am  3.  Sept.  [1522?]  dankt  More  seinen  heranwach- 
senden  Kindern  (im  Alter  zwischen  1 1  und  1 7)  fiir  ihre  Briefe  und  gibt  ihnen 
konkrete  Anleitungen  zum  guten  Briefschreiben.  Aus  seinen  Worten:  "Verum 
hoc  vnum  moneo  seu  seria  scripseritis,  seu  meracissimas  nugas,  omnia  tamen 
diligenter  et  meditate  scribi  volo"  (R.  107),  meint  man  den  gleichen  Gedanken 
zu  vernehmen,  mit  dem  Erasmus  die  "studierende  Jugend"  ermahnt:  ".  .  .  sed 
prius  res,  de  quibus  scribere  constituerint,  solertissima  cogitatione  dispici- 
ant.  .  .  .  Eque  his  omnibus  diligenter  pensiculatis  .  .  ."  (Oo,  316),  dann  erst 
mogen  sie  schreiben. 

Ein  drittes  Beispiel.  Der  einzige  uns  erhaltene  Brief  Mores  an  seine  Frau 
Alice,  ist  ein  Trostbrief. 

.  .  .  2ilbeit  ...  it  wer  greate  pytie  of  so  mych  good  corne  loste  yet  sythe 


HUBERTUS  SCHULTE  HERBRUGGEN  509 

it  hathe  lyked  hym  to  sende  vs  suche  a  chaunce,  we  muste  and  ar  bounden 
not  onely  to  be  content  but  also  to  be  glade  of  his  visitacion.  He  sent 
vs  all  that  we  haue  loste  and  sythe  he  hathe  by  syche  a  chaunce  taken 
yt  away  ageyne  his  pleasuer  by  fulfylled  ...  we  haue  more  cause  to  thanke 
hym  for  our  losse  then  for  our  wynnyng,  for  his  wysedome  better  seethe 
what  ys  good  for  vs  than  we  do  ourselves  .  .  .  (R.  174). 

More  wendet  hierin  die  von  Erasmus  aufgefiihrte  dritte  Methode  des  Trostes 
in  Fallen  zwangslaufig  dauerhaften  Ungliicks  an.  Erasmus: 

Hie  philosophorum  rationes  et  praeter  caeteros  Stoicorum  plurimum 
adiuuabunt,  si  eiusmodi  calamitatem  .  .  .  gradum  quendam  ad  maxima 
commoda  iactum  esse  ostendemus.  Solet  enim  summa  virtus,  summaque 
felicitas  a  durissimis  initiis  plerumque  proficisci:  idque  exemplis  approba- 
bimus,  si  theologico  more  eiusmodi  tempestatem  a  superis  propitiis  im- 
missam  dicemus  .  .  .  (Oo,  434). 

Nicht  ohne  Grund  haben  wir  hierzu  ein  Beispiel  aus  Mores  englischen  Briefen 
gewahlt,  um  wenigstens  an  einer  Stelle  zu  zeigen,  dafi  auch  muttersprachliche 
Briefe  den  Strukturmustern  der  lateinischen  Epistolographie  folgen.*^ 


Zusammenfassung 

Mores  (erhaltener)  Briefwechsel  beginnt  lateinisch  und  endet  englisch.  Er 
folgt  damit  einer  in  der  europaischen  Kulturgeschichte  wohlvertrauten  und 
im  Zusammenhang  mit  der  Aufgliederung  des  universalen  romischen  Reiches 
in  eigenstandige  Nationalstaaten  stehenden  allgemeinen  Tendenz  von  der  uni- 
versalen Latinitas  fort  und  zur  Nationalsprache  hin.  Teil  dieses  Prozesses  bil- 
det  die  auch  bei  More  zu  beobachtende  rhetorische  Systematisierung  des 
englischen  Briefs  in  Anlehnung  an  lateinische  Muster.  Neben  der  Wahrung 
bestimmter  Regeln  der  mittelalterlichen  Artes  dictandi  bemiihen  sich  Mores  la- 
teinische Briefe  immer  wieder  auch  um  eine  direkte  imitatio  antiker  Vorbilder. 
Schliefilich  offenbart  ihr  Briefwechsel  auch  die  Seelenverwandtschaft  dieses 
Freundespaares,  nicht  allein  dadurch,  dafi  die  mit  Erasmus  gewechselten 
Schreiben  das  grofite  Konvolut  in  Mores  gesamter  Korrespondenz  darstellen, 
sondern  auch  in  zahlreichen  formalen  wie  gedanklichen  Ubereinstimmungen. 

Dennoch  bleibt  es  riskant,  aus  beobachteten  Gleichartigkeiten  auf  direkte 
Abhangigkeiten  schliefien  zu  wollen.  Jeder  Komparatist  kennt  das  Problem. 
Aufschlufireich  ist  in  diesem  Zusammenhang  der  "Hochverratsprozefi"  gegen 
More.*^  Einer  der  Anklagepunkte^^  lautete  auf  Verschworung  mit  Bischof 
Fisher.  Er  stiitzte  sich  darauf,  sie  beide  hatten  das  Suprematsgesetz^'  mit 
einem  "zweischneidigen  Schwert"  verglichen.  Mit  anderen  Worten:  behaup- 
tete  kausale  Abhangigkeit  wegen  beobachteter  gleichlautender  Formulierung. 


KIO  ARTES  DICTANDI  UND  ERASMISCHE  THEORIE 

Aus  dem  Paris  News  Letter*^  wissen  wir,  wie  der  erfahrene  Jurist  More  diesem 
sog.  "Beweis"  vor  Gericht  erfolgreich  begegnete.  Er  versicherte,  er  habe  sich 
mit  Fisher  nie  iiber  diese  "Zweischneidigkeit"  beraten;  wenn,  was  ihm  un- 
bekannt  sei,  Fisher  in  gleicher  Weise  geantwortet  habe,  so  lage  das  an  der 
Gleichartigkeit  ihres  Denkens  und  Studierens.  Und  wer  wollte  den  Gegen- 
beweis  dafiir  antreten,  dafi  dies  nicht  auch  fur  More  und  Erasmus  gilt?  More 
selbst  und  seine  Richter  mahnen  uns  zur  Vorsicht. 


Anmerkungen 


1.  Princeton  1947  (zitiert  als  R.  mit  Nummer  des  Briefes).  Aliens  Opus  epistolarvm 
Des.  Erasmi  Roterodami ,  Oxford  1906-58,  wird  zitiert  als  A.  mit  Nummer. 

2.  New  Haven  and  London  1961  u.6. 

3.  (Neue  Beitrage  zur  englischen  Philologie,  5),  Miinster  i.W.  1966  (zitiert  als  NB 
mit  Nummer  des  Briefes). 

4.  Moreana  (Angers),  15/16,  1967,  241-47;  87/88,  1983,  35-42. 

5.  Da  einige  Briefe  allein  in  Thomas  Stapletons  Tres  Thomae,  Duaci  1588,  nur  als 
Exzerpte  iiberliefert  sind,  ist  nicht  immer  eindeutig,  ob  sic  aus  ein  und  demselben  oder 
aus  verschiedenen  Briefen  stammen. 

6.  Meine  Zusammenstellungen,  "Sir  Thomas  More:  A  Revised  Calendar  of  His  Cor- 
respondence" und  "A  Checklist  of  Lost  Letters,"  werden  demnachst  in  der  Zeitschrift 
Moreana  (Angers)  erscheinen. 

7.  Vgl.  meine  "Briefe  der  Freundschaft:  Erasmus  von  Rotterdam  und  Thomas  More," 
in:  Literaturwissenschaftlichesjahrbuch,  N.F.  24,  1983,  29  ff.;  F.J.  Worstbrock  (Hg.),  Der 
Brief  im  Zeitalter  der  Renaissance  (Mitteilung  IX  der  Kommission  fur  Humanismusfor- 
schung),  Weinheim  1983. 

8.  26  H.VIII,  c.  23,  aufgehoben  durch  Statute  Law  (Repeals)  Act  1977. 

9.  Vgl.  meine  Rekonstruktion,  "The  Process  Against  Sir  Thomas  More,"  in:  Law 
Quarterly  Review,  99,  1983,  113  ff. 

10.  Vgl.  A.  Ungnad,  Babylonische  Briefe  aus  der  Zeit  der  Hammurabi- Dynastie,  in:  Vor- 
derasiatische  Bibliothek,  6,  1914,  passim. 

11.  H.  Bresslau,  Handbuch  der  Urkundenlehre ,  Berlin  '^1958,  11,1,2. 

12.  Vgl.  E.  J.  Polak,  A  textual  study  of  J.  de  Dinant's  'Summa  Dictaminis',  Geneve  1975; 
der  Freundlichkeit  des  Editors  schulde  ich  Dank. 

13.  Wir  miissen  uns  auf  eine  typisiert-vereinfachte  Struktur  beschranken;  fiir  de- 
tailliertere  Informationen  vgl.  meine  Einfiihrung  in  NB,  xiiiff. ;  J.  J.  Murphy,  "Al- 
beric  of  Monte  Cassino:  Father  of  the  Medieval  Ars  Dictaminis',"  in:  American  Benedictine 
Review,  22,  1971,  129  ff. 

14.  Ideen-  und  wortgeschichtlich  delikat  sind  die  kirchlichen  Urspriinge  des  Wortes 
"Diktator." 

15.  Miinchen,  Bayerische  Staatsbibliothek,  Cod.  lat.  Mon.  14784,  fols.  3-15;  Teil- 
abdruck  in  Ludwig  Rockingers  Brief steller  und  formelbikher  des  eilften  bis  vierzehnten  jahr- 
hunderts  (Quellen  und  Erorterungen  zur  bayerischen  und  deutschen  Geschichte,  9), 
Munchen  1863-1864  (reprint  New  York,  1961),  I,  9-28. 

16.  Editio  princeps:  Paris  (Badius  Ascensius),  1506.  Moderne  kritische  Edition  von 


HUBERTUS  SCHULTE  HERBRUGGEN  5II 

Craig  R.  Thompson  als  Bd.  Ill,  1  der  Yale  Edition  of  the  Complete  Works  of  St.  Tho- 
mas More,  New  Haven  and  London  1974. 

17.  Von  David  Knowles  (Religious  Orders  in  England,  I,  Cambridge  1959,  469)  als  der 
Kartauser  John  Batmanson  identifiziert. 

18.  Die  Antike  in  den  Epigrammen  und  Brief  en  Sir  Thomas  Mores  (Beitrage  zur  englischen 
und  amerikanischen  Literatur,  1,  hgg.  von  Franz  H.  Link  und  Hubertus  Schulte 
Herbriiggen),  Paderborn  1984;  ihr  ist  meine  nachfolgende  Wiirdigung  verpflichtet. 

19.  Vgl.  H.  Koskenniemi,  Studien  zur  Idee  und  Phraseologie  des  griechischen  Briefes  bis  400 
n.Chr.  (Annales  Academiae  Scientiarum  Fennicae,  ser.B,  torn.  102.2).  Helsinki  1956; 
K.  Schraede,  Grundzixge  griechisch-romischer  Brieftopik,  in:  Zetemata,  48  (1970). 

20.  Baumann  (p.  166,  Anm.  11)  verweist  auf  R.  16/A.  388:  R.  26/A.  481;  R.  30/A, 
502;  R.  88/A.  1090;  R.  148/A.  1770. 

21.  So  etwa  R.43,  63,  108,  128. 

22.  R.  106,  135. 

23.  So  beispielsweise  in  R.  3  an  John  Colet,  R.  48  an  Edward  Lee,  R.  65  an  Guil- 
laume  Bude,  R.  135  und  163  an  Frans  Cranevelt,  R.  166  =  NB  182^an  Johannes 
Cochlaeus,  R.  180  an  Konrad  Goclenius. 

24.  Baumann,  100  ff.,  105  ff.,  166. 

25.  More  verlangt  von  seinen  Kindern:  "Nunc  expecto  a  singulis  in  singulos  dies 
epistolas"  (R.  107). 

26.  An  Bischof  Tunstall  schreibt  More:  "Quanquam  omnes  literae,  vir  dignissime, 
mihi  sunt  iucundae  quae  perferuntur  abs  te,  tamen  quas  scripsisti  proxime  fuerunt  longe 
iucundissimae  .  .  ."  (R.  28). 

27.  Vgl.  Mores  Briefe  an  seine  Tochter  Margaret,  R.  108,  128. 

28.  "Liberet,  mea  Margareta,  mihi  diu  tecum  his  de  rebus  coUoqui  .  .  .  multo  minus 
suauem  quam  hoc  colloquium  tecum."  (R.70). 

29.  "Pertvlit  tandem  Petrus  codes,  Erasme  charissime,  tuam  Egidiique  nostri  diu 
expetitas  effigies  .  .  ."  (R.  46/A.  683). 

30.  R.  40/A.  601. 

31.  In  seinem  ersten  erhaltenen  Brief  an  More  schreibt  Erasmus:  "Vix  vUis  literis 
consequi  queam  quibus  diris  huius  tabellarii  caput  deuouerim,  cuius  vel  indiligentia 
vel  perfidia  factum  arbitror  vt  expectatissimis  Mori  mei  literis  fuerim  frustratus."  (R. 
1/A.  114). 

32.  Vgl.  R.  W.  Chambers,  Thomas  More,  London,  1935,  38. 

33.  Eine  Studie  iiber  die  Bibel  in  Mores  Briefen  fehlt.  Vgl.  Germain  Marc'hadour, 
Thomas  More  et  la  Bible  (De  Petrarque  a  Descartes,  20),  Paris  1969;  ders.,  The  Bible 
in  the  Works  of  Thomas  More,  5  Bde.,  Nieuwkoop  1969. 

34.  Baumann,  167. 

35.  Ebd.,  und  174  ff.  (Appendix). 

36.  Baumann  (167)  bezieht  sich  auf  eine  briefliche  Bitte  William  Gonells  vom  De- 
zember  1514  an  Henry  Gold,  ihm  ein  Exemplar  ("copy")  der  Briefe  Ciceros  zu  senden, 
"as  More  wants  to  use  it." 

37.  A.  71  vom  Marz?  1498  aus  Paris  an  Robert  Fisher;  A.  1 15  vom  November  1499 
aus  Oxford  an  seinen  Mazen,  Lord  Montjoy.  Genau  dazwischen  liegt  Erasmus'  erster— 
erhziltener  — Brief  an  More,  A.  114/  R.  1. 

38.  Editio  princeps  von  Matthias  Mahler,  Erfurt,  1520;  im  gleichen  Jahre  ebenfalls 
von  Johann  Schoffer  in  Mainz. 

39.  Libellus  de  conscribendis  epistolis. 

40.  Kritische  Edition  von  Jean-Claude  Margolin  in:  Opera  omnia  Desiderii  Erasmi  Ro- 
terodami,  1,2,  Amsterdam  1971,  153-579;  zitiert  als  Oo. 


512  ARTES  DICTANDI  UND  ERASMISCHE  THEORIE 

41.  Ihre  Freundschaft  begann  mit  Erasmus'  erstem  Besuch  auf  der  Insel  (1498/99) 
und  verband  sie  bis  zum  Tode. 

42.  Mit  49  (erhaltenen)  gewechselten  Briefen  nimmt  Erasmus  an  Zahl  die  Spitzen- 
stellung  unter  Mores  Korrespondenzpartnern  ein. 

43.  Beispielsweise  ihre  gemeinsamen  Ubersetzungen  der  Dialoge  Lukians. 

44.  Vgl.  K.  Smolak's  Einfiihrung  in:  Erasmus  von  Rotterdam,  Ausgewdhlte  Schriften,  ed. 
Werner  Welzig,  VIII,  Darmstadt,  1980,  XLI. 

45.  R.  15  an  Dorp,  R.  83  an  einen  Monch,  R.  148  an  Bugenhagen. 

46.  R.  86  an  Brie,  R.  190  an  Frith. 

47.  R.  87/A.  1087. 

48.  Vgl.  meine  Einfiihrung  zu  NB,  xxxviii  (Literatur!). 

49.  Zu  Mores  Prozess  siehe  Anm.  9. 

50.  Mores  Anklageschrift  in  Nicholas  Harpsfields  Life  of  Moore,  ed.  E.  V.  Hitchcock 
(Early  English  Text  Society,  186),  London  1932  etc.,  272. 

51.  26  H.VIII,  c.l. 

52.  Ein  handschriftlich  innert  14  Tagen  in  Paris  verbreiteter  Bericht  iiber  Mores 
Prozess  und  Hinrichtung,  Text  in  Harpsfield,  a.a.O.,  258  ff. 


The  Latin  Grammar  of  Philipp  Melanchthon 

Kristian  Jensen 

During  the  course  of  the  fifteenth  century  the  Latin  language  was  in- 
creasingly recognized  as  an  historical  phenomenon  which  had  gone 
through  various  phases.  Accompanying  this  awaireness  was  a  grow- 
ing interest  in  understanding  the  nature  of  classical  Latin.  Laurentius  Valla's 
Elegantiarum  libri  iUustrates  the  achievement  of  the  early  Humanists  in  this  field. 
His  work  was  an  important  source  of  inspiration  for  the  succeeding  genera- 
tions. It  became  more  or  less  de  rigeur  to  mention  his  name  when  some  spe- 
cific Latin  construction  was  under  discussion. 

The  Humanists  also  took  an  especial  interest  in  education:  naturally  they 
wanted  to  impart  their  new  philological  knowledge  to  their  pupils,  the  future 
administrators,  secretaries,  notaries  and  so  on.  By  the  end  of  the  century  even 
the  Latin  of  the  notaries  was  noticeably  influenced  by  the  newly  discovered 
classical  language,  and  they  by  no  means  represent  the  most  accomplished  Latin 
writers  of  the  period. 

The  Humanists  did  manage,  in  other  words,  to  change  the  common  use  of 
Latin.  Therefore,  it  might  come  as  a  surprise  that  the  Humanists'  contribu- 
tion to  the  grammatical  text-book  as  a  genre  was  not  great.  The  Italian  Hu- 
manist grammars  were  neither  structurally  nor  in  detail  much  different  from 
their  late  medieval  predecessors.  Much  of  the  newly  acquired  knowledge  of 
classical  Latin  could  not  be  presented  within  the  traditional  framework.  Thus, 
for  instance,  Perottus  found  no  room  in  his  grammar  proper  for  the  descrip- 
tion of  a  crucial  construction  as  the  accusative  with  the  infinitive.*  He  men- 
tions it  in  an  unsystematic  appendix  on  letter  writing,  where  we  cdso  find  his 
other  Humanist  observations  on  Latin  construction. 

The  Humanists  developed  no  new  approach  to  grammatical  description,  per- 
haps because  they  were  averse  to  any  kind  of  theoretical  approach,  which  could 
confuse  grammar  with  philosophy  and  thus  encumber  the  lesirner  with  com- 
plicated concepts  which  brought  him  no  closer  to  mastering  classical  Latin 
usage.  As  I  see  it,  the  main  problem  facing  the  Humanist  grammarians  was 


514  THE  LATIN  GRAMMER  OF  PHILIPP   MELANCHTHON 

how  to  describe  classical  Latin  usage  with  a  terminology  and  a  general  ap- 
proach which  had  been  created  for  a  somewhat  different  purpose. 

Philipp  Melanchthon's  Latin  grammar  originally  appeared  as  two  separate 
works.  The  section  traditionally  known  as  etymologia  first  appeared  in  Hage- 
nau  in  1525  under  the  name  of  Grammatica  Latina,  without  the  permission 
of  the  author.^  The  year  after,  it  was  printed  again  in  a  revised  and  author- 
ised edition,  yet  again,  in  Hagenau.  The  syntax  was  first  printed  in  Hagenau 
in  1526.  Bindseil,  in  his  edition  of  Melanchthon's  grammars  has  provided  an 
all  but  exhaustive  list  of  the  editions  of  these  two  works. ^  They  amount  to  a 
total  of  248  and  thus  compare  well  with  the  other  spectacular  success  in 
sixteenth-century  grammar,  Lily's  Latin  Grammar,  which  although  it  remained 
in  use  well  into  the  nineteenth  century,  ran  to  only  about  160  editions.  Me- 
lanchthon's grammars  were  in  use  for  a  more  limited  period.  His  name  ap- 
peared with  much  reduced  frequency  on  the  titlepages  of  Latin  grammars 
already  by  the  end  of  the  seventeenth  century.  The  last  edition  before  Bind- 
seil's  critical  edition  of  1854  appeared  in  1757  in  Leipzig. 

Melanchthon's  grammatical  works  were  so  widely  used  and  recognized  as 
an  authority  that  in  the  Lutheran  countries  it  practically  amounted  to  heresy 
to  admit  deviation  from  them.  As  late  as  1624  in  Denmark  an  explicitly  un- 
Melanchthonian  grammar  caused  a  scandal  involving  not  only  the  university, 
but  also  the  King's  Council  and  even  Christian  IV  himself.*  Quite  often,  how- 
ever, Melanchthon  was  merely  a  name  put  on  the  titlepage  of  a  book  to  bes- 
tow authority  on  a  work  which  bore  only  a  vague  resemblance  to  the  original. 
Like  "Donatus"  it  came  to  mean  simply  elementary  grammar.  This  process 
of  changing  the  text  began  quite  early.  Already  in  1540  a  revised  version  of 
the  works  was  published  in  Frankfurt,  edited  by  a  friend  of  Melanchthon,  Mi- 
cyllus.^  A  revision  of  the  syntax  was  published  separately  in  1538.^  For  the 
present  study,  I  have  used  Bindseil's  edition  which  is  based  on  the  1526  editions. 

With  a  few  exceptions  Humanist  grammatical  textbooks  were  meant  for  pri- 
mary education,  and  there  is  no  doubt  that  Melanchthon's  was  as  well.^  It  was 
meant  to  be  a  teacher's  copy,  presumably  to  be  learnt  by  heart  by  the  pupils 
who  had  to  repeat  what  the  teacher  read  out  loud.  Melanchthon's  Sachisches 
Visitationsbuch  from  1527  gives  a  good  impression  of  how  the  grammar  was 
meant  to  be  used  in  the  schools.^  In  the  grammar  itself  we,  here  and  there, 
find  what  could  be  described  as  stage  directions,  meant  for  the  teacher  only, 
for  instance  in  the  syntax:  Sunt  autem  admonendi  pueri,  non  omnium  nominum  ac- 
cusatiuos  promiscue  omnibus  actiuis  subici  posse,  sed  habendum  esse  rationem  (pqaoewq. 
In  a  late  medieval  school  book  we  find  the  following  dialogue:  Es  tu  scholaris? 
Sum.  Quid  legis?  Non  lego,  sed  audio }^  Practice  had  not  changed  in  the  Human- 
ist classroom. 

The  existence  of  pirate  editions  of  the  grammars  gives  yet  another  part  of 
the  picture.  It  was  read  out  so  slowly  that  the  pupils  could  copy  down  word 
for  word  what  the  master  said.  This  manner  of  teaching,  although  attacked 


KRISTIAN  JENSEN  515 

by  pedagogues  later  in  the  century/^  was  widespread,  and  explains  why  we 
have  so  many  works  that  consist  of  pupils'  notes,  both  from  school  and  uni- 
versity level:  Ramus,  Buccaferrea,  and  Pomponatius,  for  instance. 

It  is  clear  that  Melanchthon  had  some  pedagogical  intention  with  his  book 
and  that  he  thought  this  to  be  of  greater  importance  than  the  scholarly  dis- 
cussions of  the  nature  of  various  grammatical  phenomena.  In  a  sense  he  is  a 
very  radical  Humanist  educator  here.  If  a  formulation  made  it  easy  for  a  school- 
boy to  acquire  good  Latin  usage,  it  was  of  secondary  importance  whether  the 
definitions  were  theoretically  tenable.  For  instance,  under  the  discussion  of  the 
gerunds  he  distinguished  between  an  active  form  that  is  close  to  the  infinitive 
and  a  passive  form  that  is  close  to  the  participle.  This  is  basically  our  modern 
distinction,  which  is  pedagogically  useful,  but  is  presumably  far  too  schematic 
to  account  fully  for  the  actual  Latin  usage.  Melanchthon  was  aware  of  this 
and  simply  said:  Mihi  ad puerilem  captum  plus  facere  uidetur  eorum  sententia  qui  ge- 
rundia  ea  demum  meant  quoB  sui  uerbi  casus  regunt,  ut  salutandi  amicos.^^  This  might 
appear  similar  to  Aldus  Manutius's  approach  when  he  discussed  the  gerund.  ^^ 
He  claimed  to  use  the  approach  outlined  by  Valla,  which  is  indeed  likely.  ^'^ 
Perottus  also  knew  it  and  tried,  unsuccessfully  to  incorporate  it  into  his  gram- 
mar. Aldus,  however,  said  that  Valla's  approach,  notwithstanding  its  correct- 
ness, was  unsuitable  for  school  purposes.  Consequently  he  stuck  to  the 
inconsistent  passages  provided  in  various  pgirts  of  Priscian.  His  attitude  is,  there- 
fore, after  all,  not  similar  to  Melanchthon's.  The  latter  deviated  from  tradition 
in  order  to  provide  the  most  useful  description.  Aldus,  on  the  other  hand,  re- 
peated a  description  which  he  himself  knew  to  be  inadequate,  basically  be- 
cause he  lacked  the  courage  to  change  what  was  recognized  as  the  established 
truth. 

Melanchthon's  pedagogical  attitude  is  presumably  to  be  detected  in  most 
of  his  definitions.  They  are  akin  to  the  traditional  ones,  but  they  are  so  ab- 
breviated and  so  unphilosophical  that  they  must  have  made  every  grammaticus 
philosophicus  blanch.  The  most  outrageous  example  is  perhaps  the  definition 
of  the  noun:  Nomen  est  pars  orationis  quai  rem  signiftcat  non  actionem.  Indeed  in 
the  Frankfurt  edition  from  1546  actionem  was  changed  into  agere  aliquid  aut 
pati}^  It  must  have  been  very  provocative,  and  Melanchthon  will,  of  course, 
have  known  all  the  possible  arguments  against  it. 

The  two  works  of  Melanchthon's  are  clearly  related  to  fifteenth-century 
grammar,  and  if  one  compares  it  with  Italian  Humanist  grammatical  efforts 
from  Guarino  to  Sulpitius,  one  will  recognize  the  structure  of  his  works  in  many 
points.  There  is  indeed  no  reason  why  one  should  not  assume  that  Melanch- 
thon knew  the  widely  distributed  works  of,  for  instance,  Perottus  and  Sulpi- 
tius.^^ Valla  is  often  mentioned,  albeit  often  polemically.^^ 

Initially  we  find  the  well-known  partes  grammatices:  orthographia,  prosodia,  etym- 
ologia,  syntaxis.  Orthography  is  done  away  with  very  quickly  in  a  few  senten- 
ces. This  was  to  be  learned  through  practice:  ccstera  docebit  usus,  artium  magister. 


5l6  THE  LATIN   GRAMMER  OF  PHILIPP   MELANCHTHON 

Prosody,  originally  printed  as  an  appendix  to  the  syntax,  was  given  a  separate 
work.  ^^  The  whole  book  called  Grammatica  is  thus  dedicated  to  etymologia. 
It  discusses  the  partes  orationis  in  the  order  of  Donatus  without  defining  the  term. 
Nor  are  uox  and  littera  defined,  as  it  was  otherwise  normally  done  in  elemen- 
tary grammars. ^^  We  do  not  find  any  etymological  explanation  of  the  ter- 
minology either.  Melanchthon  sticks  strictly  to  his  purpose. 

The  noun  has  also  its  accidents  in  the  order  of  Donatus,  but  Melanchthon 
leaves  out  qualitas  and  in  the  first  edition  also  numerus}^  The  adjective/substan- 
tive distinction  is  dealt  with  first,  not  as  part  of  the  species  of  the  noun  as  it 
traditionally  was.  It  is  probably  taken  first  because  it  is  the  most  important 
distinction.  We  find  a  rather  untraditional  but  very  pedagogical  description 
of  the  difference:  Substantiuum  cui  non  potest  addi  Man,  Weib,  Ding,  ut  campus. 
Adiectiuum  cui  addi  potest  Man,  Weib,  Ding,  ut  albus  uir,  alba  mulier,  album  pecus. 
He  neither  attempts  to  establish  an  ontological  distinction,  nor  to  make  the 
possible  forms  of  hie  differentiate,  as  it  was  often  done  in  Italy  in  the  late  me- 
dieval period  and  also  by  the  Humanists.  ^^ 

Under  the  pronoun  Melanchthon  also  discusses  the  article.  He  of  course  con- 
siders it  un-Latin,  but  since  it  exists  in  German  it  poses  a  didactic  problem: 
articulatum  est:  Ich  hab  dem  man  das  gelt  gegeben,  eSojxa  rw  olvSqI  to  dgyvgiov. 
Id  Latine  non  recte  uertas:  dedi  huic  uiro  hanc  pecuniam.  .  .  .  Hcec  committo  fidelibus 
prceceptoribus  ut  copiosius  explicentP  The  procedure  might  seem  more  medieval 
than  Humanist,  but  it  is  sensible  and  the  purpose  is  to  achieve  non-medieval 
Latin. 

The  definition  of  the  verb  is  once  again  meager,  a  very  abbreviated  version 
of  Donatus:  Verbum  est  uox  significans  agere  aut  pati.  .  .  .  This  very  down-to- 
earth  un-philosophical  attitude  is  even  clearer  in  the  following  specification: 
Pueri  diserte  obseruent  discrimen  nominis  ac  uerbi.  Nomen  rerum  nomenclaturam  continet. 
Verbum  actionem  et  passionem  cum  discriminibus  temporum  et  personarum. 

Also,  the  definition  of  the  participle  has  a  solely  didactic  purpose:  Particip- 
ium  est  nomen  uerbale  significans  tempusP  Melanchthon  cannot  have  been  un- 
aware of  the  concept  of  consignification  which  would  have  been  relevant  here. 
In  fact,  the  definition  as  it  stands  hardly  makes  sense.  But  introducing  a  tech- 
nical term  like  consignification  with  its  many  philosophical  implications  would 
be  inappropriate  here. 

Among  the  consignificantia  it  seems  worth  noting  that  the  preposition  is 
defined  from  its  syntactical  adverbial  function.  This  is  one  of  the  rare  occa- 
sions where  the  newly  acquired  knowledge  of  classical  Latin  substantially 
changed  the  definition  of  a  pzirt  of  speech:  pra^positio  est  propemodum  articulus, 
uerbo  nomen  adiungens,  quod  aliquam  facti  circumstantiam  significat. 

The  syntax  is  ordered  differently  from  the  Italian  grammatical  works.  It  is 
done  by  pars  orationis.  First  we  get  the  syntax  of  the  noun  and  the  pronoun. 
Without  any  terminology  mentioned  we  get  their  concordantia  and  then  their 
regimen  case  by  case.  Thus  the  order  of  Melanchthon's  syntax  is  not  that  of  Al- 


KRISTIAN  JENSEN  517 

exander  de  Villa  Dei  and  Despauterius  either.  After  each  rule  we  get  the  ex- 
ceptions to  it,  explained  as  figures,  which  consequently  are  not  discussed  in 
a  concluding  chapter  as  it  was  traditionally  done  after  Donatus.  The  didactic 
advantage  of  having  rules  and  their  exceptions  together  is  obvious.  The  syn- 
tax of  the  verb  follows,  still  without  the  traditional  terminology  of  rection  being 
used.  The  closest  we  get  is  adsciscere,  but  the  idea  of  a  natural  order  of  words 
still  prevails  as  a  syntactical  explanation.  We  find  prcecedere  and  sequi. 

The  idea  of  a  natur2il  order  of  words  is  medieval.  We  find  it,  for  instance, 
in  Alexander. ^^  For  Melanchthon,  however,  this  is  not  as  it  was  for  Alexander 
a  guideline  for  how  to  write  Latin.  He  is  well  aware  that  this  sort  of  rule  does 
not  reflect  classical  usage.  In  a  section  of  the  syntax  called  De  periodi  he  says: 

Orditur  sententiam  nominatiuus,  aut  quod  nice  nominatiuijungitur.  Hunc  proxime 
sequitur  uerbum  finitum,  deinde  adiicitur  obliquus  alicubi  et  aduerbia  et  adtexunt 
scepe  plura  nomina,  prapositiones  scepe  aut  Integra  commata,  aut  uerba  singula, 
coniunctiones.  Hunc  ordinem  uerborum  in  interpretando  utile  est  a  pueris  exigere.  .  .  . 
Ego  uero  in  sermone  non  requiro  hanc  puerilem  structuram,  in  quo  ueterum  con- 
suetudinem  imitari  compositio  debet.  Sed  in  interpretando  censeo  adiuuari  infirma 
puerorum  ingenia,  si  ad  hunc  modum  quern  prcescripsi  uocabula  sigillatim  enum- 

28 

erentur. 

Melanchthon  cannot  say  more  clearly  that  he  used  this  medieval  feature  only 
as  a  didactic  device,  to  make  it  clearer  to  German  schoolboys  what  was  going 
on  in  Latin  syntax.  Medieval  and  Renaissance  grammar  has  often  been  ac- 
cused of  not  paying  any  attention  of  the  need  to  teach  Latin  as  a  foreign  lan- 
guage. This  is  of  course  true  to  some  extent,  but  they  frequently  worked  with 
circumlocutions  cind  models  for  translating  the  vernacular  idiom  into  Latin, 
in  order  to  facilitate  the  understanding  of  Latin  syntax.  Melanchthon  uses  this 
device  with  particular  circumspection. 

Before  leaving  Melanchthon,  one  should  note  that  he  gives  a  brief  descrip- 
tion of  the  accusative  with  the  infinitive  in  the  grammar  itself,  a  clear  descrip- 
tion of  the  usage  of  cases  after  the  comparatives  and  the  superlatives,  and  even 
a  very  short  description  of  the  usage  of  modes  in  subordinate  sentences. ^^ 

Thus,  to  conclude,  Melanchthon  is  more  radical  than  his  Humanist  Italian 
predecessors  in  adapting  his  grammatical  doctrines  to  his  didactic  purposes: 
that  of  giving  rapid  instruction  in  the  writing  of  good  Latin.  He  is  little  re- 
strained by  the  traditional  formulations,  and  obviously  does  not  care  what  phil- 
osophical problems  grammatical  definitions  might  give  rise  to.  On  the  other 
hand,  it  must  be  admitted  that  his  complete  refusal  to  use  a  technical  vocab- 
ulary and  his  brevity  in  certain  places  makes  it  very  difficult  to  understand 
what  he  was  actually  getting  at.  An  example  of  this  is  the  nominal  rection  of 
the  genitive.  Melanchthon's  rule  is:  Substantiuum  cum  substantiuo  genitiuo  casu  iun- 
gitur ?^  ]din\xs  Dionysius  Jersinus,  the  bishop  of  Ribe,  who  canvassed  for  the 
adoption  of  the  vernacular  in  explaining  Latin  grammar  and  for  abandoning 


5l8  THE  LATIN  GRAMMER  OF  PHILIPP   MELANCHTHON 

mindless  memorising,  tells  us  how  he  learnt  this  grammatical  rule,  but  was 
unable  to  grasp  from  it  which  of  the  two  nouns  should  be  put  in  the  genitive. 
He  was  therefore  beaten  up  daily  by  his  teacher  until  he  was  sent  to  a  better 
school  where  the  teacher  had  the  wit  to  explain  in  his  vernacular  Danish  what 
the  rule  meant. 

As  we  have  seen  from  his  remarks  to  the  teacher  in  the  book,  Melanchthon 
expected  the  teachers  to  be  intelligent.  That  could,  however,  by  no  means  be 
taken  for  granted,  and  in  several  places  it  is  a  serious  drawback  that  rules  are 
so  short  that  they  are  incomprehensible  without  further  elucidation.  Gener- 
ally, however,  Melanchthon  persues  his  didactic  aim  with  zin  outstanding  sin- 
glemindedness  and  proves  himself  worthy  of  the  title  prceceptor  GermanioB  even 
when  dealing  with  a  subject  which  had  been  unwieldy  in  the  hands  of  many 
other  great  prceceptores.  Compared  with  contemporary  elementary  grammars 
his  work  seems  to  be  a  good  bid  at  how  a  Humanist  introduction  to  classical 
Latin  should  be. 

Bodleian  Library 


Notes 


1.  Grammatica  Latina;  MS,  Rome;  Biblioteca  apostolica;  Vat.  Lat.  6737;  fols.  1-42 
(dat.:  1468).  For  a  brief  description  of  the  MS  cf.  G.  Mercati  "Per  la  cronologia  della 
vita  e  degli  scritti  di  Niccolo  Perotti"  Studi  e  testi,  44  (1925).  On  Perottus's  grammar 
see  in  particular  W.  Keith  Percival,  "The  Place  of  the  Rudimenta  Grammatices  in  the 
History  of  Latin  Grammar"  Respublica  Litterarum  4  (1981):  233-64. 

2.  Opera  qua  supersunt  omnia,  ed.  H.  E.  Bindseil,  28  vols.  Halle  an  der  Sale,  1834-1859. 
The  grammars  are  in  vol.  20.  Cf.  here  Bindseil's  introduction,  cols.  193-94. 

3.  Ibid,  cols.  195-243,  338-  47. 

4.  Cf.  S.  M.  Gjellerup,7^n.f  Dinesenjersin,  2  vols.  (1868-1870);  here  vol.  1,  p.  69  ff. 

5.  Ph.  Melanchthon,  Grammatica  Latina  (Frankfurt,  1540).  The  changes  mainly  con- 
sist in  an  increased  number  of  classical  quotations  and  references. 

6.  Syntaxis  .  .  .  nunc  locupletata  ut  est  ad  usum  scholarum  accomodatior  (Cologne,  1538). 

7.  Notably  Curius  Pasius  Lancilottus,  De  litteratura  non  uulgari  libri  (Ferrara,  1504); 
Thomas  Linacre,  De  emendata  structura  Latini  sermonis,  (London,  1524). 

8.  Cols.  90-96  in  vol.  26  of  the  Opera  omnia.  The  Latin  version,  Instructio  uisitationis 
Saxonica  (Copenhagen,  1538)  is  even  more  explicit  about  the  use  of  the  grammar  in  the 
classroom. 

9.  Opera,  vol.  20,  col.  357. 

10.  J.  J.  Baebler,  Beitrdge  zu  einer  Geschichte  der  lateinischen  Grammatik  im  Mittelalter, 
Halle  an  der  Sale  (1885),  contains  an  edition  of  the  MS  pp.  189-96;  here  p.  192. 

1 1 .  Thus  in  his  Grammatica  Latina  (Copenhagen,  1578),  in  the  preface  Nicolaus  Kra- 
gius  says  that  it  is  a  waste  of  expensive  paper,  for  the  pupils  never  read  their  notes  again, 
but  sold  the  paper  to  scrap-dealers. 


KRISTIAN  JENSEN  519 

12.  Opera,  vol.  20,  col.  362. 

13.  Aldus  Manutius  Institutionum  grammaticarum  libri  quattuor  (Venice,  1514),  fol.  N 
2r:  Grammatici  certant  et  adhuc  sub  iudice  lis  est .  .  .  non  me  latet  quid  Laurentius  et  alii  senserint, 
quod  nunc  ne  confundamus  pueros  prcetermittimus.  In  fragmentis  enim  mihi  cum  illis  erit  hac  de 
re  certamen. 

14.  I  have  used  Elegantiarum  libri  sex  (Venice,  1536);  here  book  1,  cap.  27. 

15.  Opera,  vol.  20,  col.  246. 

16.  Cf.  Bindseil's  apparatus  in  loc. 

17.  Sulpitius  Verulanus  Opus grammaticum  was  often  printed.  It  is  very  similar  to  both 
Perottus's  and  Aldus's  grammars. 

18.  E.g.,  Opera,  vol.  20,  cols.  297,  301,  357,  362. 

19.  Ibid.,  cols.  375-76. 

20.  Cf.  e.g.,  Perottus  as  n.  1,  fol.  Ir  sqq. 

21.  Cf.  e.g.,  Perottus  as  n.  1,  fol.  4v. 

22.  Bindseil  includes  numerus  in  his  edition. 

23.  Opera,  vol.  20,  col.  298. 

24.  Ibid. 

25.  Ibid.,  col.  324. 

26.  Ibid.,  col.  328. 

27.  Cf.  e.g.,  Alexander  de  Villa  Dei,  Doctrinale  (Venice,  1486  [GWV997]),  fol.  g.  2r-v. 

28.  Opera,  vol.  20,  col.  373. 

29.  Ibid.,  col.  360-61;  349-50;  371. 

30.  Ibid.,  col.  349. 

31.  J.  D.  Jersinus,  Anonymi Betankninger  over  systematibus grammaticis;  Copenhagen;  Rigs- 
arkivet,  Danske  Kancelli,  B164,  XIV,  Projekter  og  Planer  (dat. :  1622).  See  also  K.  Jen- 
sen, Latinskolens  dannelse  (Copenhagen,  1982),  pp.  131-36. 


Ciceronian  Influences  in  Latin  Rhetorical 
Compendia  of  the  15th  Century 

James  J.  Murphy 

One  of  the  still  unanswered  questions  about  rhetoric  in  the  earliest 
period  of  printing— from  its  origins  to  A.D.  1500  — is  whether  print- 
ing helped  to  create  a  new  type  of  rhetoric  or  whether  it  simply 
mass-produced  what  was  already  current  at  the  time.  A  painstaking  exami- 
nation of  both  the  printed  books  and  the  pre-printing  manuscript  tradition  of 
the  fifteenth  century  will  no  doubt  be  necessary  before  it  will  be  possible  to 
make  a  final  judgment  on  that  question,  since  not  enough  information  is  avail- 
able to  make  a  comparison  between  pre-Gutenberg  and  post-Gutenberg  rhe- 
toric. 

Nevertheless  it  is  now  possible  to  begin  work  on  this  problem  by  making 
an  assessment  of  the  early  printed  rhetorical  works  themselves,  since  they  are 
readily  identifiable  through  a  wide  variety  of  cataloguing  efforts.  The  current 
effort  of  the  British  Library  to  produce  a  computer-based  Incunabula  Short-title 
Catalog,  for  example,  will  when  completed  provide  a  world-wide  union  cat- 
alogue of  books  and  other  materials  printed  up  to  the  year  1500.  This  British 
Library  ISTC  will  thus  gather  into  one  machine-readable  data  base  the  infor- 
mation now  scattered  in  numerous  special  printed  catalogues,  and  will  greatly 
facilitate  the  identification  of  early  printed  rhetorical  works  not  already  known; 
however,  there  is  at  present  no  equivalent  resource  for  fifteenth-century  man- 
uscripts, despite  the  heroic  efforts  of  Paul  O.  Kristeller  and  others. 

One  of  many  possible  ways  to  begin  an  assessment  of  early  printed  rhetoric 
is  by  tracing  the  influence  of  a  given  author  on  a  number  of  fifteenth-century 
works.  The  following  essay  therefore  concentrates  on  a  major  rhetorical 
author  — Marcus  Tullius  Cicero  — whose  influence  might  be  expected  to  run 
through  both  the  manuscript  and  the  print  traditions  of  the  fifteenth  century. 
What  is  learned  about  his  use  in  print  might  then  be  compared  to  his  use  in 
pre-print  rhetorical  works  as  we  learn  more  about  those  earlier  treatises. 


522  CICERONIAN  INFLUENCES  IN  LATIN  RHETORICAL  COMPENDIA 


There  is  no  doubt  that  Cicero  was  a  popular  author  during  the  first  half 
century  of  printing.  There  were  a  total  of  332  separate  editions  of  his  various 
works  between  1465  and  1500.  To  put  this  number  in  perspective,  it  can  be 
compared  with  the  total  number  of  editions  of  Aristotle's  works  in  the  same 
period:  Aristotle  had  154  editions  compared  to  Cicero's  332,  or  only  half  as 
many.^ 

All  of  Cicero's  seven  rhetorical  works  were  printed  early:  his  De  oratore  came 
first  of  all  in  1465,  published  at  Italy's  first  press  in  Subiaco;  then  came  the 
Brutus  and  Orator,  separately,  in  1469.  De  inventione  appeared  in  1470,  the  same 
year  as  the  first  edition  of  Quintilian's  Institutio  oratoria;  also  in  1470  came  the 
Rhetorica  ad  Herennium,  then  generally  believed  to  be  Cicero's,  which  was  to  have 
eleven  more  editions  in  the  next  half  dozen  years.  Cicero's  Topica  and  his  Par- 
titiones  oratoria  were  each  published  in  1472.  All  of  Cicero's  major  rhetorical 
works,  then,  were  published  within  the  first  two  decades  from  the  beginning 
of  printing;  the  only  work  not  printed  by  1472  was  the  brief  Z)^  Optimo  genere 
oratorum,  which  came  out  in  1485.^ 

Moreover,  the  ancient  commentary  of  Victorinus  on  Cicero's  De  inventione 
was  printed  in  1474,  and  had  five  more  editions  by  1500,  making  still  another 
Ciceronian  text  version  available  to  fifteenth-century  readers.  Boethius's  In 
Topica  Ciceronis  came  out  in  1484,  and  his  De  differentiis  topicis  —  comparing  Cic- 
ero's topics  with  those  of  Aristotle  —was  published  in  the  same  year.  Clearly, 
Cicero's  rhetoric  was  readily  available.  In  fact  there  were  also  several  vernac- 
ular renderings  before  1500.  The  first  Italian-language  rhetorical  work  to  be 
printed  (in  1472)  was  the  Fiore  di  Rettorica  (also  known  as  Rettorica  nuovo  di  Tul- 
lio)  of  Galeotto  or  Guidotto  da  Bologna,  not  an  original  work  of  the  fifteenth 
century  but  rather  the  printing  of  a  medieval  paraphrase  of  the  Rhetorica  ad 
Herennium,  written  about  1266.'^  A  Castilian  rendering  of  the  ad  Herennium  was 
composed  in  1427  by  Enrique  de  Villena;  however  this  work,  now  lost,  did 
not  reach  print.  Another  index  of  Ciceronian  popularity  is  to  be  found  in  the 
Hebrew-language  rhetorical  text  of  Messerjudah  Leon,  printed  in  1475-1476 
and  recently  edited  with  translation  by  Isaac  Rabinowitz  as  The  Book  of  the  Hon- 
eycomb's Flow;  here  the  basic  rhetorical  doctrine,  the  rhetorical  doctrine,  is  sim- 
ply assumed  to  be  that  of  Cicero.^ 

Another  clue  to  the  popularity  of  things  Ciceronian  is  the  frequency  with 
which  his  orations  and  letters  were  printed  during  the  period  up  to  1500.  The 
first  orationes  were  published  in  1470  — the  Phillipics  first  — and  then  there  were 
a  total  of  32  editions  of  various  orations  up  to  1500.  Cicero's  Epistolae  adfa- 
miliares  first  appeared  in  1467,  with  four  more  editions  to  1500.  Meanwhile 
Cicero's  philosophical  works  came  as  rapidly  into  print,  with  his  De  officiis  (On 
Duty)  and  his  De  senectute  (On  Old  Age)  being  the  most  popular. 

By  comparison  the  Rhetorica  of  Aristotle  received  far  less  attention.  It  first 


JAMES  J.    MURPHY  523 

appeared  in  print  in  the  Latin  version  of  George  of  Trebizond  in  1475,  then 
in  1481  two  medieval  Latin  translations  were  published  — one  of  Hermanns 
Allemanus  and  one  of  William  of  Moerbeke,  the  second  being  accompanied 
by  the  thirteenth-century  commentary  of  Aegidius  Romanus.  The  Greek  text 
did  not  appear  until  Aldus  Manitius  published  the  Opera  omnia  of  Aristotle  in 
Venice  (1495-1498).^ 

If,  then,  we  take  the  term  "Ciceronian"  to  mean  the  entire  intellectual  rep- 
utation of  a  widely  published  ancient  rhetorician,  orator,  letter  writer  and  phi- 
losopher, the  task  of  assessing  his  entire  influence  must  be  an  immense 
undertaking,  worthy  of  a  whole  book  or  set  of  books,  and  certainly  not  capable 
of  being  covered  in  a  short  essay. 

But  in  point  of  fact  there  is  one  particular  kind  of  influence  that  can  be  traced 
quite  directly,  and  in  short  compass.  And  in  turn  it  may  provide  an  index  to 
the  general  reputation  of  Cicero.  This  one  area  is  the  use  of  Ciceronian  ideas 
by  fifteenth-century  writers  who  tried  to  compose  comprehensive  treatments 
of  the  whole  subject  of  rhetoric  —  that  is,  authors  oi  Compendia.  More  than  eighty 
original  rhetorical  works  were  printed  up  to  the  year  1500— original,  that  is, 
in  the  sense  that  they  were  written  during  this  period  and  printed  shortly  after 
their  composition.^  Of  this  total,  perhaps  one  third  deal  with  letter- writing, 
and  here  the  Ciceronian  influence  is  strong.  Another  large  group  can  best  be 
described  as  anciUary  works  —  collections  oi  exordia,  lists  of  figures  and  tropes, 
dialogues  about  rhetorical  issues,  commentaries  on  various  works,  treatises  on 
memoria,  and  the  like;  here  too  the  Ciceronian  element  is  strong.  Some  of  these 
ancillary  books  provide  an  interesting  view  of  current  issues  in  rhetorical  scho- 
larship, as  in  the  case  of  Gasparino  Barzizza  whose  Summa  praeceptorum  takes 
up  thirty  questions  dealing  with  compositio  and  ainswers  them  from  Ciceronian 
doctrine,  and  also  in  the  case  of  Mattheus  Colacius  whose  Oratoris  ftni  quo- 
rundam  contradictories  sets  up  pairs  of  opposing  statements  and  then  resolves  them 
from  a  basically  Ciceronian  point  of  view.^  The  Ducenta  problemata  in  totidem 
Quintilian  of  Raphaelus  Regius  takes  a  similar  approach.'^  All  of  these  ancil- 
lary works  simply  assume  a  general  knowledge  of  Ciceronian  rhetoric  on  the 
part  of  their  readers. 


II 

A  number  of  these  80  or  so  original  fifteenth-century  rhetorical  treatises, 
however,  C2in  be  classed  as  true  compendia.  All  but  two  are  in  Latin,  the  ex- 
ceptions being  the  German-language  Spiegel  der  waren  Rhetoric  (Mirror  of  True 
Rhetoric)  of  Friedrich  Reiderer  published  at  Freiburg  im  Breisgau  in  1492  or 
1493,  and  the  Formulare  und  Teutsch  rethorica  (Formulary  and  German  Rhetoric) 
of  Heinrich  Gessler  published  at  Augsburg  in  1483.^'  (There  are  no  other  ver- 
nacular compendia  of  the  period,  though  some  of  the  French-language  titles 


524  CICERONIAN  INFLUENCES  IN   LATIN   RHETORICAL  COMPENDIA 

could  mislead  a  casual  reader  into  believing  otherwise;  Jean  Molinet's  Uart  de 
rhetorique  vulgaire  [Paris,  1493],  for  instance,  deals  with  poetry  as  a  species  of 
music  and  thus  belongs  in  the  poetic  tradition  of  the  rhetorique  seconde  rather 
than  traditional  rhetoric. ^^) 

Some  of  these  Latin  compendia  are  fairly  short.  The  anonymous  Ars  ora- 
toria,  which  may  have  had  its  first  edition  in  the  1450's  within  a  few  years  of 
the  Gutenberg  Bible,  is  only  28  pages  long.  It  treats  the  three  genera  of 
oratory  — deliberative,  judicial,  and  epideictic  — with  sample  speeches  of  Cic- 
ero, marked  to  show  how  he  uses  different  types  of  argumentation  for  each 
of  the  genres.  It  concludes  with  the  comment  that  if  Quintilian  and  Plutarch 
were  to  be  believed,  Greek  oratory  was  superior  to  Roman  — but  then  goes  on 
to  say  that  Cicero's  oratory  proves  them  both  wrong. 

Conrad  Celtus  Protocius  needs  only  46  pages  to  provide  his  Epitoma  in  utramque 
Ciceronis  rhetoricam,  cum  arte  memorativa  nova,  et  modo  epistolandi  utilissimo  (Ingol- 
stadt,  1492).  Jakob  Locher  uses  only  34  pages  for  his  Epithoma  rhetorices  in  Mar- 
cum  Ciceronem  etfabium  Quintilianum,  printed  at  Freiburg  im  Breisgau  in  1496. 
He  writes,  he  says,  Succinctus  breviusque  for  the  sake  of  the  reader's  memory. 
He  uses  some  charts  for  compression;  his  definitions  of  terms  are  from  the  Rhe- 
torica  ad Herennium,  though  he  also  cites  Terence,  Gorgias,  Isocrates,  Theodorus 
of  Gaza,  and  Virgil  as  well  as  Cicero.  Antonius  Mancinellus  uses  only  four- 
teen pages  in  his  De  oratore  brachylogia  (Rome,  1477)  to  cover  all  five  parts  of 
rhetoric  and  still  have  space  for  a  disquisition  on  the  Julian  calendar;  how- 
ever, he  does  warn  that  all  this  knowledge  is  useless  without  practice  — jm^  as- 
siduitate  dicendi.  Incidentally  Mancinellus  among  his  many  other  works  wrote 
not  only  a  commentary  on  the  Rhetorica  ad  Herennium,  but  an  essay  supporting 
Cicero  as  its  author.  The  fact  that  his  Rhetoricen  ad  Herennium  esse  Ciceronis  ap- 
peared as  late  as  1494  indicates  that  the  issue  of  authorship  was  still  alive  al- 
most half  a  century  after  its  first  challenge  by  Lorenzo  Valla  and  others;  Raphael 
Regius,  professor  of  Greek,  Latin,  and  Rhetoric  at  the  University  of  Padua, 
addressed  the  same  issue  in  1492  in  his  own  essay,  Utrum  ars  rhetorica  ad  He- 
rennium falso  Ciceronis  inscribatur— but  he  remains  ambivalent  as  to  the  answer. 

But  if  some  of  the  compendia  are  brief,  there  are  several  major  works  which 
are  not.  They  range  from  the  comprehensive  to  the  massive.  Any  one  of  them 
deserves  separate  and  lengthy  study,  but  here  there  is  only  space  to  provide 
brief  descriptions  of  six  of  them. 

1.  Albertus  de  Eyb  (or  von  Eyb),  Praecepta  artis  rhetoricae,  which  was  written 
about  1459,  then  included  in  de  Eyb's  Margarita  poetica  (1479),  a  vast  Jlor- 
ilegium  of  more  than  400  pages,  which  also  includes  rhetorical  works  by  Gas- 
parino  Barzizza  and  Stephainus  Fliscus.^^  The  Praecepta  is  often  attributed 
to  Aneas  Silvius  Piccolomenus,  later  Pope  Pius  II.  Defining  rhetoric  as  a 
humanistic  art,  it  uses  the  traditional  six  parts  of  an  oration  (from  the  ad 
Herennium)  to  show  that  three  elements  of  style  —  or^^o,  iunctura,  numerus  —  a.rG 
important  in  all  compositions  both  written  and  oral. 


JAMES  J.    MURPHY  525 

2.  George  of  Trebizond  (Trapezuntius),  Rhetoricorum  libri  F  (Venice,  1470), 
contains  Roman  rhetoric— five  parts,  six  parts  of  an  oration,  etc.  —  with  some 
Ciceronian  orations  and  Greek  examples. ^^  Ad  Herennium  is  the  model.  Cic- 
ero appears  5  to  10  times  on  every  page,  though  Trapezuntius  warns  on 
his  last  page  that  not  everything  that  Cicero  writes  in  his  treatises  or  does 
in  his  orations  is  to  be  followed;  but  by  studying  them,  he  says,  we  will  learn 
how  to  judge  for  ourselves  how  to  act. 

3.  Guillaume  Fichet,  Rhetorica  (Paris,  1471),  has  one  book  on  inventio,  one  on 
dispositio,  and  a  third  treating  elocutio,  memoria,  pronuntiatio }^  The  main 
source  is  Cicero  (actually,  ad  Herennium)  whom  he  calls  Latini  patere/loquii, 
but  he  also  uses  Quintilian,  other  writers,  and  Cicero's  speeches.  Osten- 
sibly based  on  his  lectures  at  the  University  of  Paris,  Fichet's  book  of  nearly 
400  pages  is  broken  up  into  a  long  series  of  defmitions  of  terms  rather  than 
a  continuous  sequence  of  prose. 

4.  Guillaume  Tardif,  Rhetoricae  artis  ac  oratoriaefacultatis  compendium  (Paris,  1475), 
fills  eighty  pages,  with  a  table  of  the  39  rubrics  under  which  the  book  is 
organized. ^^  It  defines  rhetoric  as  "bene  dicendi  scientia,"  and  alleges  both 
Cicero  and  Quintilian  as  sources.  However,  the  ad  Herennium  is  the  main 
source  even  if  Tardif  argues  that  common  sense  is  a  better  guide  to  memoria 
than  the  Ciceronian  system  of  backgrounds  and  images. 

5.  The  fifth  is  the  longest.  In  1484  Johann  Koelhoff  de  Lubeck  compiled  and 
published  at  Cologne  what  is  surely  the  most  comprehensive  of  the  Latin 
compendia  of  the  period:  Liber  nevus  rhetorice  vocatus  ars  dicendi  sive  perorandi 
(sometimes  published  anonymously).^^  It  has  some  600  pages,  divided  into 
16  books  with  a  table  of  contents  that  by  itself  runs  to  20  folio  pages.  It 
draws  on  both  Cicero  and  Aristotle,  though  concentrating  on  Cicero.  Koel- 
hoff stresses  that  rhetoric  is  for  power,  a  power  stronger  than  military  force 
because  it  teaches  as  it  rules.  It  is  an  extremely  important  book,  but  so  far 
little  noted  by  students  of  rhetoric. 

6.  Gullielmus  Traversagnus,  or  William  of  Saona,  Margarita  eloquentiae,  printed 
by  Caxton  at  Westminster  in  1479,  by  the  St.  Alban's  printer  in  1480,  was 
the  first  rhetorical  text  printed  in  England. ^^  The  book  is  based  on  the  ad 
Herennium  but  argues  that  rhetoric  is  a  human  analogue  of  God's  language, 
therefore  to  be  learned  and  used  for  divine  purposes.  The  author  was  an 
Italian  Franciscan  humanist  then  lecturing  in  the  faculty  of  theology  in  Cam- 
bridge. 

All  six  of  these  Latin  compendia  are  extremely  detailed,  and  all  deserve 
further  study. 

Ill 

There  are  some  general  conclusions  and  observations  that  can  be  made  about 
these  rhetorical  treatises,  and  about  what  they  reveal  of  the  state  of  rhetoric 


526  CICERONIAN  INFLUENCES  IN   LATIN   RHETORICAL  COMPENDIA 

in  the  late  fifteenth  century.  First  of  all,  the  Cicero  who  predominates  is  ac- 
tually the  Pseudo-Cicero  of  the  Rhetorica  ad  Herennium.  It  is  his  set  of  defini- 
tions of  terms  — my^/w,  elocutio,  and  the  like  — which  show  up  nearly  everywhere, 
and  it  is  his  array  of  tropes  and  figures  (and,  equally  imporant  as  an  index 
of  influence,  his  order  of  treating  them).  It  is  his  treatment  of  insinuatio  which 
controls  discussions  of  the  exordium.  The  compendia  use  his  treatment  of  ar- 
tificial memoria  — With,  loci  and  imagines.  And  for  invention  it  is  the  Pseudo- 
Cicero's  precepts  on  status  and  the  topics  of  invention,  rather  than  the  similar 
ones  from  Cicero's  De  inventione;  moreover,  Cicero's  Topica  is  seldom  cited.  His 
De  oratore  is  not  a  major  source  for  any  of  the  Latin  compendia,  though  some 
of  the  issues  raised  in  that  book  do  appear  as  questiones  or  problems  in  some 
of  the  ancillary  books.  Cicero's  ideas  on  language  from  his  Orator  sometimes 
appear  in  discussions  of  style,  mostly,  however,  reinforcements  of  cognate  no- 
tions from  the  fourth  book  of  the  ad  Herennium  are  quoted;  in  point  of  fact, 
Quintilian's  Institutio  oratoria  is  cited  more  often  than  Orator  for  that  purpose. 

This  general  situation  was  certainly  not  due  to  any  general  ignorance  of  Cic- 
ero's rhetorical  works;  all  of  them  were  available  in  manuscript  form  at  least 
by  1422  with  the  rediscovery  oi  De  oratore  at  Lodi.  Traversagnus  for  example 
makes  a  particular  point  of  listing  all  seven  rhetorical  works  as  sources  in  the 
opening  section  of  his  Margarita  eloquentiae,  even  if  he  does  then  proceed  to  model 
his  own  book  on  the  ad  Herennium.  Rather,  the  ad  Herennium  seems  for  the  com- 
pendia writers  a  deliberate  choice  —  actually  a  logical  one  in  that  it  does  handle 
all  five  parts  of  rhetoric  in  a  way  most  of  Cicero's  works  do  not.  But  Cicero's 
Partitiones  oratoria,  itself  a  compendium  written  for  his  son  Cicero,  does  cover 
all  five  parts  and  includes  some  doctrines  — especially  some  concepts  of  topical 
invention  influenced  by  Stoic  logic  — which  are  rather  more  sophisticated  than 
those  of  his  youthful  De  inventione  (or,  for  that  matter,  of  the  ad  Herennium  it- 
self). The  Partitiones  reflects  a  lifetime  of  experience  as  lawyer  and  politician. 
Why  was  it  not  chosen?  Perhaps  the  answer  lies  in  the  tremendous  weight  of 
medieval  Ciceronianism,  with  its  massive  apparatus  of  commentaries— John 
O.  Ward  has  identified  some  450  extant  manuscripts  — a  medieval  tradition 
which  regularly  couples  the  De  inventione  and  the  ad  Herennium  and  virtually  ig- 
nores other  Ciceronian  works. ^^  But  if  we  look  to  the  middle  ages  for  reasons, 
what  then  do  we  make  of  the  influence  of  humanism?  Perhaps  the  answer  is 
simply  that  the  Rhetorica  ad  Herennium  is  a  practical,  well-organized  book,  one 
that  provides  for  all  aspects  of  a  rhetoric  that  is  usable  in  everyday  life.  A  prac- 
tical man,  after  all,  might  well  prefer  to  view  Cicero's  De  oratore  as  a  book  bet- 
ter left  to  philosophers  and  students  of  political  science. 

There  is  an  interesting  corollary  to  all  this  in  the  case  of  Quintilian's  Instit- 
utio oratoria.  The  book  is  clearly  well  known,  meriting  at  least  a  mention  from 
virtually  every  fifteenth-century  Latin  writer  on  rhetoric,  including  many  of 
the  epistolographers.^^  The  Cicero-Quintilian  coupling  is  common,  especially 
in  prefaces  stressing  the  traditional  values  of  studying  rhetoric.  But  when  it 


JAMES  J.    MURPHY  527 

comes  to  actual  quotations  or  examples,  it  is  Quintilian-as-rhetorician  who  is 
quoted  — not  Quintilian  the  educator  from  Books  1  and  2,  or  Quintilian  the 
literary  idealist  from  Books  10,  11,  and  12.  Therefore  it  is  books  3  through 
9  which  are  taken  into  the  compendia,  and  especially  Books  8  aind  9  for  re- 
marks on  the  tropes  and  figures.  Again,  it  seems  to  be  a  matter  of  deliberate 
choice.  At  one  point  Traversagnus  says  that  writing  is  an  excellent  prepara- 
tion for  speaking  — virtually  a  paraphrase  of  Quintilian's  aphorism  in  Book  10 
that  "speaking  makes  writing  easy,  writing  makes  speaking  precise"  — but  then 
Traversagnus  adds:  ut  Cicero  ait.  Jakob  Locher  does  the  same,  but  actually  quotes 
De  oratore  instead.  Fichet  intermingles  Quintilian  and  the  ad Herennium  at  times, 
without  acknowledgement.  The  Liber  novus  does  the  same. 

Perhaps  this  demonstrates  once  more  that  in  the  fifteenth  century  the  rhe- 
toric regarded  as  "Ciceronian"  is  more  accurately  seen  as  "Roman"  — that  is, 
that  the  doctrine  is  regarded  as  so  homogeneous  that  illustrations  of  it  can  be 
taken  from  any  of  the  Roman  works.  In  that  sense  Cicero  becomes  an  exam- 
ple of  the  Roman  rhetoric,  not  a  cause  of  it  or  the  only  expositor  of  it.  In  fact 
Traversagnus  says  at  one  point  that  he  is  not  writing  a  particular  rhetoric  but 
the  accepted  rhetoric  — his  book  is  new,  he  says,  not  in  announcing  any  changes 
in  rhetorical  doctrine  but  in  explaining  the  basic  rhetoric  so  his  students  at 
Cambridge  can  understand  better  the  language  of  God  and  the  uses  which  God 
intends  for  this  human  rhetoric. ^^  For  the  same  reason  (the  centrality  of  the 
rhetorical  doctrine),  the  occasional  citation  of  Victorinus's  commentary  on  the 
De  inventione  is  used  for  the  sake  of  Victorinus's  explications  of  rhetoric  in  gen- 
eral, and  not  because  of  the  popularity  of  the  De  inventione  itself.  (It  is  inter- 
esting to  note,  by  the  way,  that  contemporary  commentaries  are  seldom 
mentioned  in  the  compendia.) 

What  is  striking,  though,  not  only  in  the  compendia  but  in  virtually  every 
other  work  of  the  period,  is  the  widespread  use  of  Cicero's  orationes  as  examples 
of  both  inventional  and  stylistic  doctrines.  I  have  not  been  able  yet  to  make 
a  systematic  listing  of  the  orations  used,  but  my  impression  is  that  illustrations 
are  drawn  from  a  very  wide  range  of  his  speeches,  with  no  single  one  being 
dominant.  Collections  of  his  orations  were  of  course  easily  available,  with  a 
vigorous  manuscript  tradition  that  precedes  the  advent  of  printed  books.  This 
is  quite  clear  from  the  printing  of  excerpts  from  Ciceronian  orations  in  early 
works  — for  example  in  de  Eyb's  Praecepta  of  1459  — years  before  the  orations 
themselves  reached  print. ^"^ 

What,  then,  can  we  conclude  from  all  this? 

There  is  a  consistent  pattern  to  be  seen  in  the  compendia,  whether  short  or 
long.  It  is  assumed  that  there  is  a  central  body  of  rhetorical  doctrine,  well  enun- 
ciated and  exemplified  by  Cicero  and  other  Romans.  His  Rhetorica  ad  Heren- 
nium is  a  good  clear  statement  of  the  whole  doctrine,  while  his  various  orations 
provide  excellent  examples  of  those  ideas  put  into  practice.  Sometimes  his  let- 
ters do  the  same. 


528  CICERONIAN  INFLUENCES  IN   LATIN   RHETORICAL  COMPENDIA 

Again  and  again  there  is  a  reiteration  of  the  ancient  trilogy  of  necessities  — 
praecepta,  imitatio,  exercitatio.  Cicero  is  a  great  giver  of  precepts,  a  marvellous 
model  for  imitation  —  but  these  writers  of  compendia  all  live  in  a  modern  world 
not  an  ancient  one,  so  they  summarize  Cicero  so  that  they  can  use  him. 

No  doubt  Cicero  would  have  approved  of  that  spirit. 

University  of  California,  Davis 


Notes 


1.  Details  of  Ciceronian  incunabula  may  be  found  in  the  Gesamtkatalog  der  Wiegen- 
drucke  (Leipzig,  1925-1981),  6:502-683.  Aristotle's  works  are  described  in  2:551-670. 

2.  The  early  printing  history  of  Cicero's  rhetorical  works,  including  the  Rhetorica  ad 
Herennium,  may  be  found  in  James  J.  Murphy,  Renaissance  Rhetoric:  A  Short-title  Catalog 
of  Works  on  Rhetorical  Theory  from  the  Beginning  of  Printing  to  A.D.  1700  (New  York,  1981), 
pp.  72-97. 

3.  For  the  text  of  the  Victorinus  commentary  see  Charles  Halm,  ed.,  Rhetores  latini 
minores  (Leipzig,  1863). 

4.  Edited  in  the  last  century  as  Ilfiore  de  Rettorica  by  V.  Nannucci,  in  Manuale  della 
letteratura  del  primo  secolo  della  lingua  Italiana,  Vol.  2  (Florence,  1858). 

5.  The  Book  of  the  Honeycomb's  Flow  (Sepher  Nopheth  Suphim)  byjudah  Messer  Leon,  trans, 
and  ed.  Isaac  Rabinowitz.  (Cornell  University  Press,  1983).  The  excellent  notes  pro- 
vide a  useful  introduction  to  the  intellectual  currents  of  life  in  fifteenth  century  Italy. 

6.  See  F.  Edward  Cranz,  A  Bibliography  of  Aristotle  Editions,  1501-1600  2nd  ed.  with 
addenda  and  revisions  by  Charles  G.  Schmitt  (Baden-Baden,  1984). 

7.  For  a  discussion  of  these  works,  see  James  J.  Murphy,  "Rhetoric  in  the  Earliest 
Days  of  Printing,  1465-1500,"  Quarterly  Journal  of  Speech  70  (1984):  l-ll. 

8.  Gasparino  Barzizza  (1359?- 1431)  was  professor  at  Padua,  Ferrara,  Milan,  and 
Venice  in  addition  to  serving  for  a  time  as  Apostolic  Secretary.  His  career  has  been 
largely  neglected  by  historians  of  rhetoric  despite  his  numerous  treatises  and  letters. 
The  Summa praeceptorum  (Paris,  c.  1500)  is  edited  by  Robert  P.  Sonkowsky,  "A  Fifteenth- 
Century  Rhetorical  Opusculum,"  in  Classical  and  Medieval  Studies  in  Honor  ofBerthold  Louis 
Ullman,  ed.  Charles  Henderson  Jr.  2  vols.  (Rome,  1964),  2:259-81.  The  text  oiDetribus 
partibus  elocutionis  ac  Summa  praeceptorum  appears  on  pp.  268-76,  with  a  translation  of 
the  first  part  on  pp.  277-81.  The  standard  edition  of  Barzizza's  other  works  remains 
Gasparini  Barzizzii  Bergomatis  et  Guiniforti ftlii  opera,  ed.  Joseph  A.  Furietti  (Rome,  1 723). 

9.  Colacius  uses  citations  from  Aristotle  as  well  as  from  Quintilian  and  Cicero.  His 
Oratoris  fini  quorundam  contradictiones  was  published  at  Padua  in  1478. 

10.  Raphaelis  Regii  ducenta  problemata  in  totidem  Quintiliani  oratoriae  institutiones  deprava- 
tiones  (Venice,  1492).  The  two  hundred  problems  are  introduced  by  the  phrase  "Quid 
est,"  as  in  "Quid  est  quod  Fabius  ab  Aristotele  dissentire  videtur:  ubi  de  probatione 
artificiale  inquit?"  Regius  was  also  the  author  of  a  treatise  De  quibusdam  Quintiliani  locis, 
and  published  an  edition  of  the  Institutio  oratoriae  in  1512. 

11.  For  both  these  works  see  Helmut  Schanze,  "Vom  Manuscript  zum  Buch:  Zur 
Problematic  der  "Neuen  Rhetorik"  um  1500  in  Deutschland,"  Rhetorica  1,  no.  2  (1983): 


JAMES  J.    MURPHY  529 

pp.  61-73;  and  Murphy,  "Rhetoric  in  the  Earhest  Years  of  Printing,"  p.  8.  Also  see 
Eckhard  Bernstein,  German  Humanism  (Boston,  1983). 

12.  This  text  is  reprinted  as  Treatise  5  in  Ernest  Langlois,  Recueil  d'Arts  de  seconde 
rhetorique  (Paris,  1905). 

13.  Ars  oratoria  (Basle,  n.  d.):  Si  Quintiliano  Plutarchoque  credimus,  a  nemine  tam 
Graecorum  quam  Latinorum:  melius  perfectiusve  eloquentiam  accipe  possumum:  quam 
ex  ipsius  Ciceronis  operibus. 

14.  After  rehearsing  the  arguments  of  Lorenzo  Valla  and  others,  pro  and  con,  Re- 
gius concludes  that  the  issue  of  authorship  may  not  be  critical  to  the  use  of  so  valuable 
a  work:  Quisque  vero  illius  opusculi  auctor  fuit:  minime  est  negligendum. 

15.  The  Praecepta  had  two  separate  editions  (Basle,  1488  and  Paris,  c.  1495)  but  as 
part  of  the  Margarita  poetica  it  appeared  another  fourteen  times  between  1472  and  1495. 

16.  An  excellent  summary  of  this  book,  together  with  details  of  the  author's  career, 
may  be  found  in  John  Monfasani,  George  of  Trebizond:  A  Biography  and  a  Study  of  His  Rhe- 
toric and  Logic  (Leiden,  1976). 

17.  Fichet  devotes  58  pages  to  Invention,  53  to  Disposition,  and  75  to  Style,  Me- 
mory, and  Delivery.  The  early  history  of  printing  in  Paris  is  well  described  in  Jeanne 
Veyrin-Forerer,  LArt  du  livre  a  I'Imprimerie  nationale  (Paris,  1973);  some  useful  details 
also  appear  in  Elizabeth  Eisenstein,  The  Printing  Press  as  an  Agent  of  Change:  Commun- 
ications and  Cultural  Transformations  in  Early-Modern  Europe  (Cambridge  University  Press, 
1979-1980).  Eisenstein  believes  that  Fichet  hurried  his  Rhetorica  into  press  to  compete 
with  George  of  Trebizond's  Rhetoricorum  libri  V. 

18.  Tardif  explains  that  one  would  have  to  read  at  least  24  books  by  Cicero  and  Quin- 
tilian  to  grasp  all  of  rhetoric,  so  he  offers  instead  his  compendium  under  39  rubrics; 
he  concludes  by  noting  that  there  is  nothing  more  to  know:  Ergo  amplius  in  arte  rhe- 
torica ac  facultate  oratoria  (nisi  ut  deo  gratias  agam)  nichil  est.  Tardif  is  also  the  author 
of  a  three-part  digest,  Grammatica,  elegentia,  rhetorica,  (Paris,  c.  1480  and  Poitiers,  1488). 

19.  Koelhoff  includes  a  section  dealing  with  the  relation  of  rhetoric  to  letter- writing 
and  another  to  rhetoric  and  poetry  (Et  sciendum  que  id  quod  grece  posis  dicitur  fictio 
vocatur  latine).  Another  feature  of  the  book  is  what  he  calls  "ocular  description"  (oc- 
ularis descriptio)  —  charts  and  tables  which  he  says  can  show  for  the  eye  what  the  prose 
shows  for  the  mind;  this  is  an  interesting  development  six  decades  before  the  emer- 
gence of  Peter  Ramus  who  is  credited  by  some  modern  scholars  as  the  originator  of 
typographical  layout  as  a  means  of  exposition.  The  Liber  novus  may  in  fact  prove  to 
be  one  of  the  most  significant  rhetorical  texts  of  the  period,  especiadly  in  its  compar- 
ative treatments  of  Aristotelian  and  Roman  theories  (e.g.,  emotion,  colores,  politics  and 
rhetoric,  and  so  forth). 

20.  The  best  study  of  Traversagnus  is  that  of  Giovanni  Farris,  Umanesimo  e  Religione 
in  Lorenzo  Guglielmo  Traversagni  (1425-1505)  (Milan,  1972);  Farris  provides  detailed  bi- 
ographical information  as  well  as  an  appendix  which  presents  additional  Latin  texts 
relating  to  the  Margarita  eloquentiae.  The  Margarita  eloquentiae  has  now  been  edited  by  Far- 
ris (Savona,  1976).  After  leaving  Cambridge,  Traversagnus  wrote  at  Paris  an  Epitome 
of  the  longer  book;  this  has  been  edited,  with  excellent  notes  on  both  books,  by  Ronald 
H.  Martin,  The  Epitome  Margaritae  eloquentiae  of  Laurentius  Gulielmus  Traversaquus  de  Saona 
(Leeds:  Leeds  Philosophical  and  Literary  Society,  1986). 

21.  See  John  O.  Ward,  "Renaissance  Commentators  on  Ciceronian  Rhetoric"  in  James 
J.  Murphy,  ed..  Renaissance  Eloquence:  Studies  in  the  Theory  and  Practice  of  Renaissance  Rhe- 
toric (University  of  California  Press,  1983),  pp.  126-87. 

22.  There  were  at  least  eleven  editions  of  the  Institutio  oratoria  between  1470  and  1500, 
two  of  them  with  attached  commentaries.  By  the  time  of  the  first  full-scale  attack  on 


530  CICERONIAN  INFLUENCES  IN   LATIN   RHETORICAL  COMPENDIA 

Quintilian  by  Peter  Ramus  {Rhetoricae  distinctiones  in  Quintilianum,  Paris,  1549)  an  even 
one  hundred  editions  appeared.  Quintilian  was  excerpted  or  abstracted  in  the  incu- 
nabular  period  not  only  by  Raphael  Regius  and  Matthaeus  Colacius,  as  we  have  already 
seen,  but  also  by  Sulpitius  Verulanus.  The  lack  of  a  comprehensive  history  of  Quin- 
tilian's  influence  in  early  north  Europe  leaves  a  major  gap  in  the  cultural  history  of 
the  period. 

23.  For  example,  Traversagnus  states  in  his  Prohemium  that  Saint  Augustine,  Boe- 
thius,  and  the  medieval  scholastics  all  added  to  the  ancient  lore  of  Cicero  and  other 
Romans;  moreover,  he  says  he  finds  nothing  in  Cicero  anyway  that  is  not  found  ex- 
emplified in  Scriptures.  He  gives  Isidore  of  Seville  equal  credit  with  Cicero,  Cato,  and 
Victorinus  for  a  definition  of  rhetoric. 

24.  There  were  32  editions  of  Cicero's  orations  by  1500,  beginning  with  the  Orationes 
Philippicae  in  1470. 


Nicodemus  Frischlin's  Rhetoric 
David  Price 

Though  primarily  recognized  as  a  dramatist,  Nicodemus  FrischUn 
(1547-1590)  was  also  an  educator  and  a  gifted  orator.  In  one  of  his 
speeches,  the  Oratio  de  vita  rustica,^  he  drew  upon  years  of  rhetorical 
training  to  unleash  an  unusually  blustery  philippic  against  the  nobility  (espe- 
cially the  lesser  nobility)  of  Germany.^  As  is  common  in  Frischlin's  writings, 
this  speech  combines  laudation  and  vituperation:  it  is  both  a  praise  of  agrar- 
ian life  and  a  diatribe  against  the  decadence  of  the  nobility  and  its  brutali- 
zation  of  the  peasantry.  In  an  apologetic  response  to  the  myriad  of  enemies 
this  oration  created,  Frischlin  explained  that  he  delivered  the  speech  in  his  class- 
room in  order  to  edify  his  noble  students  not  only  in  the  art  of  rhetoric,  but 
also  the  ethics  of  political  responsibility: 

Ich  hab  aber  damalen  mein  Oration  in  selbigem  Puncten  gerichtet  /  zur 
Warnung  und  bestem  /  den  jungen  Adelspersonen  /  wolche  bey  den 
hohen  Schulen  studieren  /  und  bey  denen  ein  grosse  Notturfft  /  dass  sie 
von  allerhandt  Untugenden  abgehalten  werden.^ 

Although  the  speech  was  intended  as  an  introduction  to  lectures  on  Vergil's 
Georgics,  this  philological  subject  served  as  a  point  of  departure  for  an  assess- 
ment of  societal  responsibilities  and  injustices.  This  socio-political  focus  reflects 
a  serious  pedagogical  philosophy  Frischlin  espoused:  the  need  to  promote  ed- 
ucation among  the  nobility  in  the  hope  that  education  of  this  class  could  al- 
leviate some  of  the  potential  problems  of  a  rigid  class-society. 

The  socio-political  didacticism  in  the  Oratio  de  vita  rustica  owes  its  form  to 
the  ascendancy  of  Latin  political  rhetoric  in  the  sixteenth  century.  In  order 
to  understand  the  impact  of  Latin  rhetoric  in  the  Renaissance,  it  is  important 
to  realize  that  the  Romans  frequently  viewed  rhetoric  as  a  branch  of  political 
science.  The  three  canonical  types  of  rhetoric  —  the  deliberative,  juridical,  and 
demonstrative  forms  —  usually  encompassed  prescriptive  analyses  of  the  polit- 
ical applications  of  the  language  arts.  Formal  rhetoric  assumed  special  impor- 


532  NICODEMUS  FRISCHLIn's  RHETORIC 

tance  in  humanistic  education  because  the  genus  iudiciale  provided  a  basis  for 
eventual  study  of  law,  whereas  the  genus  deliberativum  fulfilled  the  need  for  a 
propaedeutic  curriculum  for  future  civil  servants  and  governmental  ministers. 
The  third  genre,  the  genus  demonstrativum,  provided  a  general  structure  for  an- 
alyzing issues  or  personages  from  the  opposite  poles  of  panegyric  and  vitup- 
eration. Guidelines  for  the  genre  do  not  consist  solely  of  directives  for  the 
constituents  of  speeches,  but  actually  focus  more  attention  on  aspects  to  be 
considered  when  arguing  the  merits  of  a  case.'^ 

The  political  orientation  of  Roman  rhetoric  had  a  profound  impact  on  poe- 
tics because  Renaissance  scholars  tended  to  conflate  poetics  and  rhetoric  de- 
spite universad  recognition  that  these  were  two  distinct  disciplines.  In  particular, 
the  Renaissance  concept  of  imitation  fostered  the  syncretism  of  rhetoric  and 
poetics.  Frischlin  wrote  extensively  about  two  techniques  of  imitation:  parodia 
a.nd  paraphrasis.  Frischlin's  use  of  paraphrasis,  an  exercise  Quintilian  advocated, 
is  of  special  importance  to  this  subject  because  it  entailed  recasting  prose  works 
as  poetry  and  vice  versa.  Among  Frischlin's  most  carefully  composed  works  are 
his  paraphrases  of  Horaces'  Sermones  and  Persius'  Satyrae  executed  in  great  part 
as  Ciceronian  invectives.  The  Ciceronian  recastings  illustrate  a  significant  con- 
cept: the  poetic  genre  of  satire  and  the  rhetorical  genus  demonstrativum  can  be 
refracted  through  imitation  in  such  a  way  that  they  become  cognate  genres.^ 

In  his  Oratio  de  exercitationibus  oratoriis  et  poeticis  ad  imitationem  veterum,  Frisch- 
lin organized  all  types  of  writing— fiction  and  non-fiction  —  into  one  system  as 
types  oi  oratio.  In  one  interesting  corner  of  this  system,  he  claimed  that  the 
poetic  genres  of  elegy,  ode,  satire,  epigram,  etc.  are  subgenres  of  the  rhetor- 
ical genus  demonstrativum.  This  evaluation  of  the  poetic  significance  of  the  genus 
demonstrativum  reveals  2in  epideictic  approach  to  literature,  and  it  possesses  sig- 
nificance for  other  genres  not  mentioned  in  this  category.  The  transference 
of  the  techniques  of  the  genus  demonstrativum  into  the  realm  of  poetry  compelled 
the  poet  virtually  by  definition  of  classical  Latin  rhetoric  to  look  outward  to 
censure  or  affirm  aspects  of  society.  Humanists  tended  specifically  to  bind  to- 
gether rhetorical  and  dramatic  studies.  Because  of  the  prominence  of  rhetoric 
and  drama  in  the  humanistic  educational  reform,  the  attempt  to  view  the  two 
genres  as  related  phenomena  heightened  the  coherence  of  humanistic  peda- 
gogy. Both  disciplines  shared  the  goal  of  developing  communicative  skills. 
Formal  rhetoric  offered  an  argumentative  framework  for  presenting  views  on 
virtually  any  topic,  whereas  performing  drama  in  schools  was  supposed  to  en- 
hance verbal  skills  by  increasing  vocabulary,  improving  elocution,  and  fost- 
ering development  of  a  good  memory.  Such  a  view  of  the  value  of  performing 
drama  fostered  the  increasingly  pronounced  tendency  to  rhetoricize  dramatic 
composition. 

But  a  strong  tradition  of  rhetorical  interpretation  of  drama  played  an  im- 
portant role  in  this  development.  Following  tendencies  found  as  early  as  Do- 
natus'  commentary  on  Terence,  many  Renaissance  scholars,  preeminent  among 


DAVID  PRICE  533 

whom  was  Melanchthon,  interpreted  aspects  of  Terentian  plays  as  illustrations 
of  the  three  canonical  genres  of  ancient  rhetoric.  Often  Melanchthon  limited 
his  observations  to  language  used  in  particular  scenes,  but  he  viewed  Teren- 
ce's Andria,  for  example,  in  its  entirety  as  a  form  of  the  genus  deliberativum:  "in 
Andria  genus  orationis  deliberativum  est.  Tota  enim  fere  fabula  in  eo  con- 
sistit."^  After  Melanchthon,  many  commentaries  stressed  Terence's  impor- 
tance as  a  model  rhetorician  by  identifying  rhetoric2il  genres  and  techniques 
used  in  his  comedies. 

Frischlin  was  heir  to  this  tradition  of  rhetoricizing  dramatic  interpretation, 
but  he  seems  to  have  noticed  one  important  problem  with  it: the  socio-political 
function  of  classical  Latin  rhetoric  could  not  be  documented  in  interpretations 
of  New  Comedy.  Frischlin  remedied  this  incompatibility  by  shifting  his  focus 
to  the  plays  of  Aristophanes,  where  indeed  the  political  aspect  of  rhetoric  could 
have  an  application  in  dramatic  theory. 

In  his  essays  on  comedy,  composed  as  introductory  material  for  an  Aris- 
tophanes edition,  Frischlin  did  not  overtly  seek  to  use  rhetorical  interpreta- 
tions or  classifications;  instead,  he  used  the  political  vocabulary  of  ancient 
rhetoric  to  characterize  Aristophanes'  works.  In  the  dedicatory  epistle  to  Ru- 
dolf II,  for  example,  Frischlin  sought  to  make  Aristophanic  comedy  palatable 
to  the  emperor  by  hailing  Aristophanes  as  a  responsible  critic  of  political  af- 
fairs.^ 

Aristophanes,  however,  was  not  especially  popular  in  the  sixteenth  century 
and  was  generally  held  to  be  vastly  inferior  to  the  writers  of  New  Comedy. 
To  counteract  strong  prejudices  against  Aristophanes,  Frischlin  penned  a  de- 
tailed refutation  of  the  sweeping  condemnation  of  Aristophanic  comedy  in  Plu- 
tarch's Moralia}^  By  appropriating  Plutarch's  comparative  method,  Frischlin 
demonstrated  that  the  strengths  of  New  Comedy  can  also  be  found  in  Old 
Comedy.  Furthermore,  Frischlin  identified  Aristophanes'  concern  for  the  state 
and  his  unrelenting  attacks  on  those  misguiding  society  as  virtues  of  Aristo- 
phanic comedy  not  to  be  found  in  the  plays  of  Menander.  As  if  to  create  a 
symbol  for  his  view  of  Aristophanes  as  politicized  New  Comedy,  he  transformed 
the  popular  Ciceronian  mirror  simile  used  to  describe  the  didacticism  of  Roman 
comedy.  In  Frischlin's  simile,  a  political  body,  and  not  an  individual,  looks 
on  the  play  as  if  into  a  mirror.  By  seeing  a  reflection  of  societal  ills  in  the  come- 
dies of  Aristophanes,  a  political  body,  in  this  case  the  city  of  Athens,  could 
mend  its  state  of  affairs: 

Sed  voluit  poeta,  ut  populus  Atheniensis,  sua  suorumque  Magistratuum 
turpitudine,  in  scena,  tamquam  in  speculo  conspecta,  malum  Reipub- 
licae  statum  emendaret,  et  ad  meliorem  frugem,  ac  saniora  consilia  an- 
imum  revocaret.^' 

In  one  respect  Frischlin's  analysis  of  Aristophanic  poetics  drew  upon  rhe- 
torical theory.  The  governmentad  function  of  Aristophanic  comedy  according 


534  NICODEMUS  FRISCHLINS  RHETORIC 

to  Frischlin's  description  conforms  to  the  nature  of  the  rhetorical  genus  delib- 
erativum.  The  genus  deliberativum  embraced  speeches  of  general  civic  interest  and 
explicitly  included  considerations  of  political  policy,  precisely  the  aspect  Frisch- 
lin  praised  in  Aristophanes.  Although  the  vituperative  mode  of  Aristophanes' 
attack  on  political  problems  assumes  qualities  of  the  genus  demonstrativum,  the 
primary  goal  of  Frischlin's  analysis  of  Aristophanes  was  to  establish  Old  Comedy 
as  a  model  for  modern  writers  of  comedy  so  that  the  political  content  of  Aris- 
tophanic  comedy  could  replace  the  apolitical  stuff  of  New  Comedy. 

All  of  Frischlin's  major  plays  entail  consideration  of  serious  social  or  intel- 
lectual problems,  and  frequently  reflect  a  schoolman's  interest  in  juridical  and 
conciliar  rhetoric.  His  critical  views,  furthermore,  are  generally  expressed  in 
panegyric  and  vituperative  modes.  Although  the  relative  proportions  of  the 
critical  and  affirmative  vary  in  his  plays,  vacillation  between  satiric  and  pan- 
egyric postures  is  a  basic  characteristic  of  his  style.  The  most  vituperative  plays 
are  Phasma  and  Priscianus  Vapulans,  the  most  panegyric  are  Frau  Wendelgard  and 
Hildegardis  Magna,  whereas  he  struck  a  fairly  even  balance  between  the  two 
modes  in  Rebecca,  Susanna,  dind  Julius  Redivivus. 

Rebecca,  Frischlin's  first  drama,  contains  several  scenes  in  which  conciliar 
rhetoric  is  used.  Abraham  takes  council  with  Eliezer  and  Isaac,  and  much  of 
Eliezer's  diplomatic  mission  (the  wooing  of  Rebecca)  could  also  be  viewed  as 
an  example  of  this  genre.  The  political  content  of  the  conciliar  rhetoric  focuses 
on  the  necessity  of  education  for  nobleman  as  well  as  the  significance  of  re- 
ligion for  a  political  marriage.  There  are  also  negative  examples  of  counciliar 
rhetoric  in  several  scenes  with  Ismael  and  his  debauched  cronies.  The  vast 
amount  of  deliberative  rhetoric  probably  resulted  from  the  fact  that  Frischlin 
composed  Rebecca  in  large  part  as  a  parodistic  imitation  of  Terence's  Andria  — 
the  play  Melanchthon  felt  consisted  entirely  of  deliberative  rhetoric.  The  theme 
of  education  of  the  nobility  is  also  developed  in  the  characterizations  of  Isaac 
and  Ismael.  Whereas  Abraham  praises  Isaac's  essentially  humanistic  educa- 
tion, his  other  son  Ismael,  at  least  in  Frischlin's  play,  is  an  uncouth  ogre  who 
has  had  no  education,  is  not  of  the  proper  faith,  and  spends  his  waking  hours 
hunting  and  boozing.  The  contrast  of  the  ideal/unideal  in  these  two  noblemen 
is  not  exhausted  with  the  depiction  of  Ismael  as  an  unlettered  reprobate;  his 
worst  quality  is  his  grotesque  abuse  of  the  peasantry  under  his  sway.  Ismael's 
actions  graphically  illustrate  the  potential  problem  of  the  Lutheran  doctrine 
of  the  divine  sanctity  of  the  class  society.  Although  Frischlin  never  opposed 
this  doctrine  as  codified  in  Melanchthon's  Loci  Communes,  he  frequently  pitched 
his  political  drama  as  warnings  against  this  danger  in  the  system. 

For  his  next  Biblical  drama  he  took  up  the  popular  story  of  Susanna.  As 
evident  in  Birck's  and  Frischlin's  Latin  versions,  Susanna  offered  an  ideal  op- 
portunity to  dramatize  juridical  rhetoric.  In  Frischlin's  play  the  prosecuting 
judge  delivers  a  carefully  constructed  speech  with  a  beautifully  plain  narratio 
of  the  alleged  crime.  The  presiding  judge  introduces  this  lengthy  set-speech 


DAVID   PRICE  535 

with  an  admonishment  that  the  prosecutor  use  plain  attic  style:  "Die  tu  ergo 
prior,  Simeon,  et  die  omissis  vocum  ambagibus  /  More  attico."^^  By  contrast, 
Susanna's  own  defense  speech  is  an  emotionally  charged  statement,  wherein 
her  pathos  is  spent  in  a  lament  of  injustice  on  earth.  Against  the  backdrop  of 
the  proper  use  of  juridical  rhetoric,  Frischlin  inserted  an  important  sociolog- 
ical factor.  The  abuse  of  Susanna  is  paralleled  and  even  exceeded  in  a  subplot 
about  peasants  seeking  redress  for  abominable  injustices.  The  peasants  are  not 
only  forced  to  pay  bribes  to  the  corrupt  judges,  they  are  also  told  that  they 
cannot  get  legal  redress  from  the  perpetrator  of  the  crime  because  he  is  of  a 
higher  social  status.  Thus,  Frischlin  projected  an  intensely  pessimistic  image 
of  corruptness  in  class-society  in  order  to  lend  emphasis  to  his  view  that  the 
nobility  must  be  educated  to  meet  the  political  responsibilities  of  its  birthright. 

Julius  Redivivus,  though  purportedly  composed  "in  laudem  Germaniae,"  en- 
compassses  an  assessment  of  politics  and  humanistic  culture  cast  largely  in  the 
laudatory  and  critical  forms  of  the  genus  demonstrativumP  The  political  and  cul- 
tural issues  are  bound  up  inextricably  with  the  problem  of  the  Renaissance 
cultural  imitation,  since  Frischlin  uses  the  criteria  of  antiquity  —  embodied  in 
the  resurrected  Cicero  and  Caesar  — as  an  evaluative  basis. 

The  idea  for  this  type  of  cultural  comparison  is  not  original  with  Frischlin. 
Since  the  rediscovery  of  Tacitus'  Germania  in  the  fifteenth  century,  humanists 
had  a  heyday  comparing  ancient  and  modern  Germany.^*  The  reception  of 
Tacitus  in  the  Renaissance,  however,  posed  some  complex  problems  for  the 
concept  of  cultural  imitation.  Tacitus  extolled  virtues  he  ascribed  to  the  Ger- 
man people  in  order  to  contrast  such  basic  values  as  bravery,  loyalty,  and  fa- 
milial cohesion,  with  the  incipient  decay  of  imperial  Rome.  Fortunately,  literary 
imitation  possessed  the  important  concept  oicertamen,  enabling,  as  it  were,  im- 
itation and  progress  to  occur  simultaneously.  Frischlin  used  the  concept  of  ^^r- 
tamen  in  his  paradigm  of  cultural  imitation  throughout  yw/iM.?  Redivivus,  where 
Caesar  and  Cicero  are  incessantly  exposed  to  the  German  manifestation  of 
"translatio  imperii"  and  "translatio  artium."  According  to  the  ideal  of  cultural 
imitation,  the  greatness  of  Germany  should  arise  through  imitation  of  the 
strengths  of  ancient  tradition  and  avoidance  of  its  weaknesses.  Caesar  aptly 
expresses  this  ideal  of  certamen  extended  to  the  realm  of  politics  by  praising  the 
Germans  for  learning  from  the  faults  of  other  nations.*^ 

Frischlin,  however,  was  aware  of  problems  inherent  in  a  combination  of  Tac- 
itean  praise  of  old  Germany  and  the  Renaissance  concept  of  cultural  imita- 
tion. Idezdly,  the  Germans  would  have  assumed  the  strengths  of  Roman  culture, 
while  retaining  the  virtues  of  Tacitean  Germany.  In  actuality,  numerous  pa- 
rallels are  drawn  between  the  decline  of  Rome  and  the  state  of  the  German 
Empire.  Hermannus,  the  general  in  the  play  and  a  figure  with  a  very  Tac- 
itean view  of  things,  is  outraged,  for  instance,  at  the  import  of  luxury  goods 
from  Savoy.  He  fears  that  these  luxuries  will  weaken  the  moral  fiber  of  the 
Germans,  just  as  Asian  finery  had  softened  the  rigor  of  the  ancient  Romans. 


536  NICODEMUS  FRISCHLIn's  RHETORIC 

However,  Hermannus  is  eventually  compelled  to  agree  with  Mercury's  asser- 
tion that  Germany's  problems  have  arisen  from  the  crapulance  and  general 
irresponsibility  of  the  nobility,  and  not  from  the  influence  of  foreign  cultures: 

Equidem  Germanos  hodie  reperias  praeclaro  loco 
Natos,  qui  cubitum  prius  nunquam  abeunt  quam  sint  ebrii 
Nee  surgunt  nisi  crapulosi  nee  quicquam  inceptant  operum 
Nisi  poti  (lines  1755-58). 

Because  the  modern  Germans  have  assumed  the  vices  of  the  ancient  Romans, 
it  is  clear  that  the  Tacitean  critique  of  Rome  has  entered  into  Frischlin's  por- 
trayal of  the  modern  Germans.  In  other  words,  the  paradigm  of  cultural  im- 
itation has  opened  up  a  critical  perspective. 

The  political  message  oi Julius  Redivivus  is  generated  from  an  attempt  to  glor- 
ify the  German  imperium  as  the  continuation  of  the  Roman  Empire.  In  2.3, 
Caesar  introduces  the  topic  of  the  Empire  by  asking  who  holds  power  in  Ger- 
many. Hermannus'  answer  confounds  him:  "Romanus  imperator,  quem  vulgo 
omnes  dicunt  Caesarem"  (line  897).  The  confusion  and  subsequent  clarifica- 
tion emphasize  the  concept  of  cultural  imitation,  since  Hermannus  expresses 
the  view  that  the  imperium  passed  from  the  Romans  to  the  Germans.  None- 
theless, Hermannus'  exaltation  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  of  the  German  Na- 
tion is  sharply  undercut  by  the  contrast  of  political  reality.  He  waxes  patriotic 
in  his  proud  description  of  the  ideal  of  the  system  and  its  mythic  connection 
to  the  Roman  imperium,  but  the  chaos  of  the  Empire  constantly  creeps  into  the 
play,  particularly  in  the  last  two  acts.  In  fact,  morbid  prognoses  of  catastrophic 
warfare  dominate  Act  5.  Fearing  that  impending  wars  will  flood  his  realm  with 
damned  souls,  Pluto,  the  devil,  says  that  Charon  should  construct  two  ad- 
ditional ferries  in  order  to  be  able  to  handle  the  heavy  traffic.  Pluto  also  men- 
tions the  incessant  Turkish  threat  and  finally  cites  numerological  predictions 
that  the  world  will  end  within  five  years.  In  response  to  this  forecast  of  im- 
pending doom,  Frischlin  portrays  the  general-prince  Hermannus  as  a  heroic 
figure  trying  to  maintain  the  strength  of  Germany  during  a  period  of  peace. 
Hermannus  tells  Cicero  and  Caesar,  both  somewhat  taken  aback  by  the 
presence  of  so  much  military  might,  that  there  is  peace  for  the  moment,  but 
preparations  for  trouble  must  be  made  because  foreign  troops  are  planning 
to  pass  through  his  country  en  route  to  the  Netherlands  (1.2). 

The  literary  accomplishments  of  German  humanism  are  embodied  in  the 
poet  Eobanus  Hessus  (1488-1540),  a  figure  drawn  by  Frischlin  to  represent 
his  notion  of  the  poet's  role  in  society.  In  a  sense,  Eobanus  seems  to  exemplify 
the  ethic  implicit  in  "die  Kunst  geht  nach  Brot."  At  three  points  in  the  play, 
authors  function  as  encomiasts  for  political  leaders:  Cicero  delivers  a  lauda- 
tory introduction  of  Caesar  to  Hermannus  (lines  327  ff.);  Eobanus  Hessus  reads 
from  his  panegyric  to  the  emperor  (lines  645  ff.);  and  Eobanus  delivers  an  en- 
comion  to  Julius  Caesar  (lines  1438  ff.).  Frischlin  clearly  felt  that  it  was  a  poet's 


DAVID  PRICE  537 

responsiblity  ex  officio  to  commemorate  the  deeds  and  accomplishments  of  rul- 
ers. In  return,  however,  the  ruler  should  be  willing  to  support  the  arts;  Caesar 
expresses  the  concept  of  political  patronage  for  the  arts  rather  optimistically: 
"Immo  equidem;  nam  poetarum  ingenia  /  Semper  grata  fuere  imperatoribus" 
(lines  1454-55).  Nonetheless,  it  is  important  to  observe  that  Frischlin  carefully 
formulated  the  image  of  the  ideal  poet  in  Julius  Redivivus  so  that  the  role  of 
the  poet  transcends  the  adulatory  function  one  might  associate  with  the  office 
of  a  poet  laureate.  Caesar  claims  twice  in  the  course  of  the  play  that  he,  as 
an  emperor,  doesn't  want  to  hear  idle  flattery  in  lieu  of  the  truth.  When  Al- 
lobrox,  a  French  merchant,  learns  that  he  is  speaking  to  a  king,  he  says  that 
he  is  afraid  to  say  another  word  because  he  doesn't  know  the  art  of  flattery: 
"Je  ne  puis  flatter"  (line  1073).  Caesar,  however,  believes  that  Allobrox'  view 
is  based  on  misconception  and  strongly  urges  that  one  need  only  speak  the 
truth:  "si  modo  possit  verum  dicere"  (line  1074).  Likewise,  Caesar  responds 
in  the  negative  when  Cicero  asks  if  the  former  would  prefer  flattery  to  frank- 
ness.*^ Thus,  Caesar  projects  the  ideal  ruler  who  wishes  to  be  told  the  truth 
rather  than  be  fed  on  cajolery. 

The  ideal  for  the  poet  is  formulated  most  lucidly  in  a  passage  where  Pluto 
asserts  that  it  is  the  poet's  responsiblity  to  praise  faults  and  censure  virtues. 
The  devil's  negative  definition  of  the  ideal  enhances  the  rhetorical  impact  of 
the  formulation  in  a  manner  similar  to  litotic  emphasis.  Pluto  has  been  irked 
especially  by  poets  who  dare  to  use  TtaQQTjoia  (that  is,  the  practice  of  speaking 
truthfully,  especially  when  offering  criticism).  The  devil  promises  the  worst 
for  these  free-speaking  poets  who  work  against  Satan's  influence  in  the  world: 

Ego  poetas  volo  adulari,  assentari  civibus  nostris, 
Volo  laudare  illos  culpanda  et  rursus  culpare  laudanda. 
Hoc  si  faxint  poetae,  praemium  a  nobis  merebuntur 
Et  grati  erunt  deinceps  Satanici  consortibus  regni. 
Sin  pergant  veritatem  effari  et  allatrare  virtutes 
Plutonis  et  increpare  meorum  flagitia  servorum, 
Faxo,  ut  vicissim  vires  experiantur  nunc  meas  isti 
nappTjaia^ovTe?  poetae  (lines  1841-48). 

Frischlin's  statement  "volo  laudare  illos  (sc.  poetas)  culpanda  et  rursus  culpare 
laudanda"  is  a  programmatic  espousal  of  the  literary  theory  grounded  in  the 
rhetoricization  of  poetics.  The  socio-political  focus  of  the  rhetorical  ^^nuj  demon- 
strativum  becomes  the  basis  of  poetic  composition.  As  can  be  seen  in  Julius  Re- 
divivus and  all  of  his  dramas,  the  poetic  ideal  has  become  thoroughly  politicized, 
but  has  not  declined  to  an  exclusively  panegyric  function. 

Frischlin  knew  Ttaggrjoia  as  a  figure  of  thought  in  Roman  rhetoric.  In  the 
Rhetorica  ad  Herennium  a  long  passage  is  devoted  to  the  figure  of  naggrjoiay  or 
licentia,  as  it  was  translated  into  Latin. '^  The  author  of  the  Rhetorica  ad  Heren- 
nium emphasized  the  value  of  remonstrative  licentia,  but  also  advised  orators 


538  NICODEMUS  FRISCHLIN's  RHETORIC 

to  palliate  the  sharpness  of  oratio  naqgrjoia  by  conjoining  to  it  some  words  of 
praise.  Frischlin  took  this  rhetorical  figure  very  seriously,  and  one  could  view 
his  entire  corpus  as  being  anchored  on  the  principle  of  the  responsible,  po- 
litically conscious  poet  exercising  naggrjoia. 

In  all  of  his  plays,  Frischlin  lapses  into  rhetorical  posturing  along  the  lines 
of  the  genus  demonstrativum,  and  in  some  of  his  plays  he  provided  examples  of 
juridical  (see  Susanna)  and  deliberative  rhetoric  (see  Rebecca  and  Hildegardis 
Magna).  Yet,  the  rhetorical  approach  to  literature  was  ultimately  important 
for  Frischlin  because  it  enabled  him  to  foist  the  political  consciousness  of  rhe- 
torical studies  onto  poetry.  Frischlin's  writing  on  rhetoric,  his  analysis  of  Aris- 
tophanic  comedy,  and  his  own  plays  indicate  this  beyond  doubt.  We  can 
conclude  that  Frischlin's  epideictic  approach  to  poetry  fostered  the  socio-political 
pungency  of  many  of  his  works,  but  also,  unlike  the  typical  satiric  poet,  en- 
abled him  to  write  political  poetry  in  the  form  of  panegyric.  Without  living 
a  contradiction,  Frischlin  was  a  satirist  and  a  panegyricist.  Nonetheless,  the 
frequent  mixture  of  panegyric  and  vituperation  in  his  writings  rendered  them 
complex,  stimulating,  and,  to  his  contemporaries,  often  controversial. 

Yale  University 


Notes 


1 .  This  speech  was  printed  in  Orationes  insigniores  aliquot,  ed.  M.  George  Pfliiger  (Ar- 
gentorati:  Johann  Carolus,  1605),  pp.  253-333. 

2.  For  this  and  all  details  of  Frischlin's  life,  see  David  Friedrich  Strauss,  Leben  und 
Schriften  des  Dichters  und  Philologen  Nicodemus  Frischlin  (Frankfurt  am  Main:  Literarische 
Anstalt,  1856). 

3.  Entschuldigung  und  endtliche  bestendige  Erkldrung  Doctoris  Nicodemi  Frischlini  (Tubin- 
gen: Georg  Gruppenbach,  1585),  p.  3. 

4.  Frischlin  wrote  an  extensive  rhetorical  handbook:  Rhetorica:  seu  institutionum  ora- 
toriarum  libri  duo:  nunc  primum,  in  gratiam  studiosae  iuventutis  typis  excusi,  ed.  Hieronymus 
Megiser  (Lipsiae:  Michael  Lantzenberger,  1604). 

5.  See,  for  example,  Auli  Persii  Flacci  Satyrae  Sex  a  Nicodemo  Frischlino  Alemanno  ex  ve- 
tustiss.  codicibus fide  Paraphraso  luculenta  illustratae  {Basi\ea.e:  ad  Perneam  Lecythum,  1582) 
where  Frischlin  provides  rhetorical  analyses  of  his  paraphrases  of  Persius'  Satires. 

6.  Printed  in  Orationes  insigniores  aliquot,  pp.  112-168. 

7.  Melanchthon,  Opera  quae  supersunt  omnia,  ed.  C.  G.  Bretschneider  and  H.  E.  Bind- 
seil  (Braunschweig:  Apud  C.  A.  Schwetschke  et  Filium,  1853),  vol.  19,  col.  695. 

8.  See  Marvin  Herrick,  Comic  Theory  in  the  Sixteenth  Century  (Urbana:  University  of 
Illinois  Press,  1950),  pp.  12-18. 

9.  See  Nicodemus  Frischlin,  Aristophanes,  veteris  comoediae  princeps,  poeta  longe  facetis- 
simus  et  eloquentissimus,  repurgatus  a  mendis,  et  imitatione  Plauti  atque  Terentii  interpretus,  ita 
utfere  carmen  carmini,  numerus  numero,  pes  pedi,  modus  rrwdo,  latinismus  graecismo  respondeat 


DAVID  PRICE  539 

(Francoforti  ad  Moenum:  Johannes  Spiess,  1586),  fol.  )(  2v:  "Nam  is  auctor  est  Aris- 
tophanes, qui  magna  cum  Hbertate  homines  seditiosos  ac  turbulentos  in  scenam  pro- 
ducit,  eosque  nominatim  perstringit:  qui  principum  in  RepubHca  virorum  dissensiones 
acerbe  insecatur." 

10.  See  section  853  in  Moralia,  ed.  Berthold  Hasler  (Leipzig:  Teubner,  1978),  vol. 
5,  fasc.  2.  Plutarch's  critique  peaks  in  a  general  dismissal  of  Aristophanes:  "For  he  (i.e. , 
Aristophanes)  seemed  to  have  written  poetry  not  for  a  decent  man;  rather,  he  wrote 
his  disgraceful  and  licentious  words  for  the  .  .  .  (textual  problem),  and  the  blasphe- 
mous and  bitter  words  for  the  slanderous  and  malicious"  [my  translation]. 

11.  Aristophanes,  p.  15v. 

12.  Nicodemus  Frischlin,  Operum  poeticorum  [.  .  .]  pars  scenica  (Strassburg:  Bernhard 
Jobin,  1589),  p.  145. 

1 3 .  The  sizable  scholarship  on  the  play  shows  a  disproportionate  interest  in  its  lau- 
datory qualities  and  a  general  unwillingness  to  note  Frischlin's  critical  bent.  Samuel 
Wheelis  noticed  some  of  the  criticism  in  Julius  Redivivus  in  his  article,  "Nicodemus  Frisch- 
lin's Julius  Redivivus  and  its  Reflections  on  the  Past,"  Studies  in  the  Renaissance  20 
(1975):  106-17.  The  essay  on  Julius  Redivivus  is  based  on  Wheelis'  "Nicodemus  Frisch- 
lin: Comedian  and  Humanist."  (Diss.  Berkeley,  1968).  The  most  extreme  example  of 
a  one-sided  aproach  to  Julius  Redivivus  is  Jacques  Ride,  "Der  Nationalgedenke  in  Julius 
Redivivus  von  Nicodemus  Frischlin,"  Daphnis  9  (1980):719-40.  See  also  Richard  Schade 
"Julius  Redivivus:  Entstehung  und  Stuttgarter  Auffiihrung,"  in  Julius  Redivivus,  trans. 
Jakob  Frischlin,  ed.  Richard  E.  Schade  (Stuttgart:  Reclam,  1983),  pp.  159-73. 

14.  See  Jacques  Ride,  "L'image  du  Germain  dans  la  pensee  et  la  letterature  alle- 
mandes  de  la  redecouverte  de  Tacite  a  la  fm  du  XVIeme  siecle"  (Diss.  Paris  1976); 
and  Frank  Borchardt,  German  Antiquity  and  Renaissance  Myth  (Bsiltimore  and  London: 
Johns  Hopkins  Press,  1971). 

15.  See  Julius  Redivivus,  lines  940-42.  All  citations  of  this  play  are  taken  from  Julius 
i?^rfiyiyMJ,  ed.  Waltherjanell  (Berlin:  Weidmann,  1912  =  Lateinische  Litteraturdenkmdler 
des  15.  und  16.  Jahrhunderts ,  vol.  19). 

16.  See  Julius  Redivivus,  lines  1494-97. 

17.  See  Rhetorica  ad Herennium,  ed.  and  tr.  Harry  Caplan  (Cambridge,  Mass.:  Har- 
vard Univ.  Press,  1981),  pp.  348  ff. 


The  Proper  Translation  of  constitutio  in 
Daniel  Heinsius'  De  tragoediae  constitutione 

and  Some  Implications  of  the  Word 
for  Seventeenth-Century  Literary  Theory 

Paul  R.  Sellin 

In  greener  years,  when  salad-days  lure  men  into  rash  undertakings  like 
translations  from  Latin,  I  collaborated  in  publishing  an  English  trans- 
lation of  Daniel  Heinsius'  De  tragoediae  constitutione,  one  of  the  most  im- 
portant critical  texts  of  the  late  Renaissance.^  In  general  reviewers  were  kind, 
and  the  translation  seems  to  have  withstood  some  test  of  time  with  fair  suc- 
cess. However,  there  was  one  point  with  which  certain  readers  took  issue. 
That  was  the  rendering  of  Heinsius'  Latin  title  De  tragoediae  constitutione  as  "On 
Plot  in  Tragedy"  in  English.  The  issue  is  an  important  one  because  it  involves 
the  meaning  and  intention  of  one  of  the  finest  critical  treatises  of  the  seven- 
teenth century.  Since  the  question  has  just  been  reopened  by  Professor  J.  H. 
Meter's  The  Literary  Theories  of  Daniel  Heinsius  (Assen,  1984),  perhaps  it  is  time 
to  address  the  matter  from  the  translators'  point  of  view. ^  With  a  little  indul- 
gence, perhaps  we  can  arrive  jointly  at  the  "truth"  about  Heinsius'  notion  of 
constitutio.  As  the  awkward  paraphrases  show  when  critics  try  to  explain  the 
term  constitutio,  it  is  not  an  easy  idea  to  capture  in  English,  and  stylistic2dly 
the  word  is  difficult  to  translate. 

Stylistics  aside,  however,  the  objections  to  the  rendering  oi constitutio  as  "plot" 
in  Heinsius'  title  involve  substantifds.  As  dissenting  reviewers  rightly  saw,  trans- 
lating constitutio  as  "plot"  is  crucial  to  approaching  Heinsius'  treatise.  That  is, 
translating  the  Latin  term  as  "plot"  makes  Heinsius'  title  refer  to  the  first  and 
foremost  qualitative  part  of  tragedy  as  enunciated  by  Aristotle's  Poetics,  where- 
as certain  interpreters  of  Heinsius  feel  that  what  he  really  intended  was  the 
"make-up"  or  Aufbau  of  tragedy  as  a  whole,  of  which  "plot"  is  but  one,  zilbeit 
central,  component.  Although  I  am  not  entirely  sure  of  Professor  Meter's  cur- 
rent stand  on  the  matter,  his  recent  formulation  of  the  problem  defines  it  well: 

The  term  constitutio  or  constitutio  rerum  (actionum)  [please  note  the  substi- 
tution of  synonyms  here]  occurs  several  times  in  Heinsius'  translation 
of  the  Poetics,  in  his  notes  to  the  Poetics  and  in  De  Tragoediae  Constitutione 


542  CONSTITUTIO  IN  HEINSIUS    DE  TRAGOEDIAE  CONSTITUTIONE 

itself  as  a  translation  of  the  Greek  phrase  he  ton  pragmaton  systasis  (synthe- 
sis) in  the  meaning  of  "composition,  construction  of  the  dramatic  action," 
and  as  such  is  a  further  description  of  the  Aristotelian  concept  of  mythos 
("plot"),  for  which  Heinsius  uses  the  term  fabula.  Since  constitutio  is  not 
meant  to  be  a  synonym  of  the  term  "plot"  but  an  explanation  of  it,  it  seems 
more  accurate  to  give  the  title  as  "On  Building  up  the  Action  in  Trag- 
edy." Since  the  syntactic  phrase  in  the  title  is  not  constitutio  actionum  tra- 
goediae  but  simply  constitutio  tragoediae,  the  question  can  be  posed  as  to 
whether  Heinsius  had  only  the  construction  of  the  plot  in  mind  or  that 
of  tragedy  as  a  whole  in  all  its  component  parts/ 

Let  me  state  directly  at  the  outset  that  the  choice  of  the  word  "plot"  in  my 
translation  of  Heinsius'  title  was  a  deliberate  one,  and  one  made  on  anything 
but  stylistic  grounds  — for  I  do  not  agree  that  constitutio  should  be  construed 
in  the  broad  sense  of  denoting  the  "construction"  or  "building  up"  of  "tragedy 
as  a  whole."  I  chose  "plot"  specifically  to  signal  to  readers  that  Heinsius'  title 
referred  not  to  the  "composition"  of  tragedy  in  its  entirety,  but  only  to  the  first 
of  the  qualitative  parts  of  tragedy  outlined  by  Aristotle.  As  reactions  to  the 
translated  title  show,  the  word  "plot"  worked  well  in  generating  exactly  the  dis- 
crimination that  I  wanted  between  constitutio  in  its  broad  sense  and  constitutio 
in  its  narrower,  more  truly  Aristotelian  one. 

My  reasons  for  this  choice  were  more  philosophical  than  lexical.  Indeed, 
when  I  first  approached  the  treatise  many  years  ago,  my  original  impulse  was 
to  read  constitutio  as  it  occurred  in  Heinsius'  title  in  much  the  same  way  as  pro- 
ponents of  the  broader  sense  now  urge.  That  is,  I  too  was  first  led  to  think 
of  the  term  lexically,  and  therefore  as  referring  to  the  "structure"  or  "make-up" 
of  tragedy.  As  my  rough  draughts  show,  I  persisted  in  this  line  of  thought  for 
a  long  time.  I  flatter  myself  in  thinking  that  Heinsius  himself  forced  me  ul- 
timately to  abandon  it.  That  is,  the  longer  one  was  exposed  to  his  text,  the 
more  one  came  to  appreciate  how  tightly  the  text  was  argued,  how  studied 
the  entelechy  informing  it  really  was.  Realizing  that,  in  dealing  with  a  critic 
with  such  a  fine  mind,  one  had  better  be  extremely  wary  of  committing  un- 
warranted violations  of  the  argument,  I  thought  it  better  to  begin  by  assuming 
that  we  cannot  know  what  Heinsius  means  except  through  his  language;  that 
a  reasoner  with  such  philosophical  awareness  as  his  was  likely  not  only  to  se- 
lect his  terms  carefully  but  eiIso  to  hold  them  constant;  and  that  the  last  thing 
one  should  do  is  to  come  to  texts  like  Heinsius'  with  pre-conceived  or  lexically 
formed  notions  and  then  impose  them  on  the  argument. 

The  essential  problem  in  interpreting  constitutio  aright  is  simple,  though  the 
ramifications  are  not.  As  the  quotation  from  Professor  Meter  suggests,  Hein- 
sius, following  Aristotle,  uses  a  number  of  terms  relating  to  mythos  that  carry 
roughly  equivalent  meanings.  Indeed,  are  these  terms  synonyms,  or  are  they 
explanations  of  the  term  mythos  as  Aristotle  conceived  it?  However,  just  be- 


PAUL  R.    SELLIN  543 

cause  these  differing  terms  seem  to  refer  to  the  same  thing  — that  is,  the  mythos, 
or  fabula,  as  Heinsius  translates  the  Greek  word  — that  does  not  give  a  trans- 
lator the  right  to  substitute  freely  among  them  in  choosing  English  readings 
or  to  expand  or  contract  them  at  will  for  stylistic  or  any  other  extraneous  rea- 
sons. Suppose  that  a  translator  was  wrong,  that  Heinsius  meant  something 
else  by  a  given  term  than  was  thought.  If  we  make  unwarranted  substitutions 
or  fail  to  keep  terms  in  the  translation  as  distinct  as  they  are  in  the  original, 
we  run  the  risk  of  collapsing  essential  distinctions,  of  erasing  forever  the  pos- 
sibility of  another  English  reader's  perceiving  a  nuance  that  the  translator  may 
have  missed.  The  principle  that  I  tried  to  follow  in  translating  Heinsius,  there- 
fore, was  to  align  terms  in  the  translation  with  terms  in  the  text,  and  to  keep 
the  translation  in  this  respect  as  consistently  parallel  with  the  original  as  pos- 
sible. At  least  that  was  the  intention. 

Now,  the  first  of  several  synonymous  terms  that  have  to  be  isolated  in  the 
De  tragoediae  constitutione  \s  fabula,  the  two  meanings  of  which  Heinsius  (follow- 
ing the  Poetics  almost  literally)  makes  lucidly  explicit  in  his  argument.^  I  trans- 
lated ^a^w/a,  not  with  the  English  term  "plot,"  but  with  the  word  "fable"  taken 
in  an  old-fashioned  sense.  There  were  two  reasons  for  so  doing.  One  is  that 
in  English  criticism  of  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries  —  from  Dry  den, 
say,  to  Samuel  Johnson  — the  term  commonly  used  for  'Ldiiirv  fabula  was  "fable" 
in  English.^  The  term  —  presumably  this  is  why  critics  liked  and  retained  it  — 
offers  the  advantage  of  capturing  both  meanings  of  the  word  mythos  that  Hein- 
sius, following  Aristotle,  assigns  to  fabula:  namely,  "fable"  in  the  sense  of  "myth" 
or  "fable"  as  in  classical  "myth"  or  even  La  Fontaine  and  Aesop;  but  also  "fable" 
in  the  sense  used  by  classical  antiquity  to  designate  literary  works  based  on 
a  "story  line,"  like  drama  or  epic,  and  hence  by  extension  meaning  a  "play." 
Quaint  as  the  term  "fable"  may  seem  in  modern  English,  it  retains  an  authen- 
tic flavor  of  what  Heinsius,  his  contemporaries,  and  his  successors  would  have 
associated  with  the  word,  and  it  is  a  coloring  that  disappears  if  one  translates 
fabula  as  "plot."  Heinsius'  idea  is  not  quite  the  same  as  the  modern  notion  of 
plot,  and  he  did  not  mean  a  loosely  conceived  modern  equivalent.  The  second 
reason  is  more  practical.  If  I  expended  "plot"  in  translating/a^ w/<2,  what  could 
I  use  to  translate  constitutio  as  I  conceive  it  when  it  turned  up  in  the  text  as 
an  independent  term?  This  is  a  question  to  which  we  shall  return  in  a  moment. 

In  addition  io  fabula,  Heinsius  also  used  a  variety  of  other  words  and  phra- 
ses to  describe  the  first  and  foremost  qualitative  part  of  tragedy,  and  I  am  not 
sure  that  anyone  has  the  right  to  exchange  them  or  paraphrase  them  indis- 
criminately, regardless  of  how  synonymous  they  may  seem.  The  most  prom- 
inent of  these  are  actio,  rerum  constitutio  and  actionum  dispositio,  not  to  speak  of 
such  allied  combinations  as  dispositio  tragica  and  even  constitutio  actionisJ  In  a 
way  all  these  words  point  to  the  same  thing,  and  one  could  hold  that  in  De 
tragoediae  constitutione  there  is  no  really  meaningful  distinction  between /z^m/a 
and  actio,  for  the  tragic  fabula  consists  oi  actio.  As  everyone  will  recognize,  such 


544  CONSTITUTIO  IN  HEINSIUS    DE  TRAGOEDIAE  CONSTITUTIONE 

synonymity  merely  reflects  the  literal  readings  in  the  Greek  text  of  Aristotle's 
Poetics.  If  the  aim  is  to  hold  English  and  Latin  terms  constant,  actio  presents 
little  difficulty,  and  I  simply  rendered  it  as  "action."  Constitutio  rerum  and  ac- 
tionum  dispositio  are  a  little  more  complicated  to  translate.  As  Professor  Meter 
observes,  these  phrases  are  Heinsius'  Latin  equivalents  of  Aristotle's  he  tonprag- 
maton  synthesis  and  he  ton  pragmaton  systasis.^  Although  different  terms  with  a 
seemingly  identical  meaning,  both  explain  Aristotle's  notion  ofmythos,  or  what 
we  today  term  "plot,"  and  Heinsius  seems  merely  to  be  paraphrasing  Aristotle 
closely,  exchanging  synthesis  and  systasis  freely  and  evidently  at  random.  Even 
so,  if  the  terms  differ  in  the  Latin  original,  they  must  also  do  so  in  the  trans- 
lation. Hence  my  translation  endeavors  throughout  to  distinguish  between  "syn- 
thesis of  incidents"  and  "construction  of  incidents,"  even  though  both  expressions 
seem  to  be  nothing  more  than  Heinsius  aping  the  language  of  Aristotle's  dis- 
cussion of  plot. 

There  are  two  other  expressions  associated  with  the  synthesis/systasis  complex 
of  which  one  should  take  note.  The  first  is  dispositio  actionis,  which  turns  neatly 
into  English  as  "arrangement  of  the  action."^  Hopefully,  the  expression  retains 
rhetorical  connotations  inherent  in  the  word  dispositio.  The  other  is  awkward 
precisely  because  it  involves  the  knotty  word  constitutio.  This  is  the  combina- 
tion actionum  constitutio,  which  I  translate,  rather  unhandily,  as  "structure  of 
actions. "^^  However  one  may  feel  about  the  stylistic  infelicity  of  this  render- 
ing, the  important  point  here  is  that  in  context  this  particular  phrase  seems 
to  be  but  another  variant  of  the  synthesis/systasis  pragmaton  complex.  Is  it  not 
plain  that  in  the  context  of  the  discussion,  the  reference  is  clearly  to  the  ex- 
planation of  mythos  or  fabula  conceived  in  Aristotle's  second  sense  as  plot  —  that 
is,  the  first  and  essential  qualitative  part  of  tragedy?  In  this  combination,  it 
seems  to  me,  constitutio  refers  not  to  the  structure  of  tragedy  as  a  whole  but 
only  to  that  part  of  it  entailing  the  interrelationship  of  incidents  in  a  serious  play. 

There  are  a  couple  of  other  variations  on  the  synthesis/systasis  theme  in  De 
tragoediae  constitutione  to  which  one  might  also  draw  attention.  For  instance,  I 
call  difabulosa  dispositio  a  "fictional"  rather  than  a  "fabulous  arrangement"  be- 
cause of  obvious  problems  with  modern  English  idiom.  ^^  Since  these  variants 
do  not  present  any  special  difficulties  that  are  relevant  to  this  discussion,  there 
is  no  point  in  going  into  further  detail.  However,  this  phrase  too  points  not 
toward  the  structure  of  tragedy  as  a  whole,  but  to  the  kind  of  actions  — namely, 
plots  — that  poets  should  incorporate  in  their  tragedies. 

What,  then,  about  Heinsius'  use  oi  constitutio  in  his  title?  How  should  it  be 
translated?  The  problem  is  that,  in  addition  to  noun  complexes  such  as  con- 
stitutio rerum,  dispositio  actionum,  and  actionum  constitutio,  the  text  o{  De  tragoediae 
constitutione  also  employs  constitutio  as  an  independent  noun  standing  in  isola- 
tion. The  most  noteworthy  instance  of  such  use  occurs  on  pp.  26-27  of  the 
1643  edition  (pp.  38-40,  1611;  pp.  21-22  in  the  MacManmon-Sellin  trans- 
lation), at  the  close  of  Chapter  3.^^  As  the  rubric  to  this  chapter  explicitly 


PAUL  R.    SELLIN  545 

States,  the  specific  endeavor  in  the  last  section  of  Chapter  3  is  to  demonstrate 
why  the  "fable"  or  fabula,  rather  than  any  of  the  other  qualitative  parts  of  trag- 
edy such  as  manners,  thought,  or  diction,  constitutes  the  principal  part  of  the 
genre.  In  the  closing  lines  of  this  section  of  the  chapter,  constitutio ,  standing 
alone  and  without  any  qualifiers,  suddenly  substitutes  for  fabula  as  Heinsius' 
designation  of  the  "synthesis  of  the  action,"  or  as  modern  English  would  say, 
the  "plot."  Taken  in  context  of  the  specific  portion  of  the  airgument  in  which 
it  occurs,  constitutio  does  not  here  serve  to  explain  what  the  tragic  plot  is  to 
be,  for  that  turns  out  to  be  the  task  of  Chapters  4-12  in  the  pages  to  come. 
For  aught  I  can  see,  constitutio  is  used  as  nothing  more  than  a  synonym  plain 
and  simple  for  fabula.  As  it  occurs  in  this  passage,  constitutio  does  not  denote 
the  "composition"  or  "structure"  or  "make-up"  of  the  tragic  poem  as  a  whole, 
but  it  is  used  to  denote  strictly  the  same  phenomenon  a.s  fabula:  namely,  the 
first  qualitative  part  of  a  drama  in  the  tragic  kind.  The  reference  in  Chapter 
3,  I  contend,  is  specifically  to  the  fabula,  the  mythos,  or,  as  modern  English  Aris- 
totelian criticism  would  put  it,  the  "plot"  of  tragedy.  While  it  must  be  said  that, 
in  an  Aristotelian  conception  of  tragedy,  plot  provides  the  organizing  prin- 
ciple to  which  all  parts  of  a  play  are  subordinate  and  in  that  sense  determines 
the  structure  of  a  tragedy,  "plot"  is  not  identicad  with  the  structure  of  tragedy 
as  a  whole  but  the  first  principle  that  informs  it.  Hence,  whenever  constitutio 
occurs  in  the  text  of  De  tragoediae  constitutione  as  an  independent  noun  standing 
by  and  of  itself,  my  translation  will  seek  to  render  the  term  as  "plot,"  and  to 
distinguish  this  use  of  it  from  others  in  which  it  does  not  stand  alone. 

One  may  quarrel  with  my  choice  of  the  word  "plot"  as  the  proper  stylistic 
rendering  oi constitutio  under  these  circumstances  but  not,  I  think,  with  the  aim 
of  the  endeavor.  To  treat  constitutio  in  isolation  as  though  it  were  identical  with 
constitutio  rerum  or  dispositio  actionum  would  be  tantamount  to  translating/a^M/a 
indiscriminately  as  actio  or  synthesis.  To  let  the  reader  think  that  Heinsius  used 
constitutio  rerum  when  he  actually  used  constitutio  standing  alone  is  risky  and  me- 
thodologically unacceptable.  In  my  text,  "synthesis  of  incidents"  does  not  sud- 
denly become  "plot"  simply  because  "plot"  sounds  better  or  because  I  arbitrarily 
will  it  so,  but  because  Heinsius  abandons  constitutio  rerum  or  actionum  for  con- 
stitutio and  such  changes  must  be  signalled  to  readers.  As  the  1611  and  1643 
editions  concur  exactly  with  respect  to  the  use  oi  constitutio  as  described  here, 
I  am  all  the  more  cautious  about  unauthorized  or  arbitrary  substitutions  in 
translating  Heinsius'  phraseology.  For  me  "plot"  must  stay  "plot"  and  "fable," 
"fable." 

Now,  what  is  a  translator  to  do  when  he  d\so  encounters  constitutio  standing 
alone  and  independently  in  Heinsius'  title?  If  the  translation  of  the  term  as 
"plot"  in  the  body  of  the  text  is  proper,  I  see  little  alternative  than  to  employ 
the  same  word  in  translating  the  title  too.  If  that  is  what  the  word  means  when 
it  occurs  by  itself  in  the  text,  we  cannot  run  to  a  Latin  dictionary  and  suddenly 
impose  a  lexically-derived  meaning  on  the  title  when  the  whim  happens  to  seize 


546  CONSTITUTIO  IN   HEINSIUS'  DE  TRAGOEDIAE  CONSTITUTIONE 

US.  The  term  in  the  title  and  the  term  in  the  text  are  the  same  and  should  be 
therefore  held  constant  in  the  translation.  As  far  as  I  can  see,  Heinsius  could 
just  have  readily  inscribed  his  work  as  De  tragoediae  fabula,  De  tragoediae  actione, 
or  even  De  tragoediae  dispositione ,  although  the  last  term  carries  too  rhetorical 
a  connotation  to  be  acceptable  — indeed,  it  fails  precisely  in  distinguishing  be- 
tween arrangement  of  the  action  and  arrangement  of  tragedy  as  a  whole.  I 
would  suggest  that  Heinsius  chose  constitutio  for  his  title  because  of  all  the  terms 
available  to  him,  it  best  reflected  the  Aristotelian  notion  of  plot  as  sy stasis  or 
synthesis  with  which  he  wished  to  strike  readers  at  the  outset. 

Contrary  to  what  others  have  urged,  I  think  that  the  title  of  the  1611  edition 
lends  this  reading  further  support.  Whereas  the  1643  edition  was  entitled  De 
tragoediae  constitutione,  the  first  version  of  the  essay  was  called  De  tragica  constit- 
utione  liber— ''On  Tragical  Plot,"  as  one  might  put  it  in  English.  As  Heinsius 
repeatedly  tells  us  in  the  course  of  his  argument,  the  essential  factor  that  dis- 
tinguishes genres  such  as  comedy  or  epic,  or  even  satire,  is  the  kind  o{ fabula 
or  constitutio  rerum  that  it  employs.  Chapter  3  particularly  maikes  clear  what  his 
book  is  about:  namely,  the  essential  part  of  tragic  form  that  provides  it  with 
its  first  principle  and  differentiates  tragedy  from  all  other  genres  entailing  "story 
lines. "^^  With  Aristotle,  the  contention  is  simply  that  the  "soul"  of  a  good  trag- 
edy is  a  special  kind  of  plot  distinct  from  those  proper  to  comedy  or  epic.  All 
other  qualitative  parts  of  tragedy  —  mor^j,  sententiae,  dictio;  even  non-essential 
parts  like  music  and  spectacle  — must  all  be  subordinate  to  this  principle,  all 
taking  on  their  especially  tragic  characteristics  because  of  the  special  and  dis- 
tinct kind  oi fabula  that  tragedy  employs.  That  is,  a  play  based  on  a  specifically 
tragic  plot  will  require  tragic,  not  silly,  characters  thinking  "tragic,"  not  comic, 
thoughts,  and  speaking  in  language  appropriate  to  tragic  feelings  and  events. 
I  note  traces  of  the  principle  still  surviving  in  the  stage  directions  of  Shake- 
speare's Macbeth,  which  call  for  "oboes"  —  those  "mysterious"  oboes,  as  some  cri- 
tics have  put  it.^'^  Heinsius'  argument  helps  me  to  see  Shakespeare's  point.  The 
serious  music  appropriate  to  tragedy  calls  for  instruments  with  (according  to 
the  conventions  of  the  time)  serious  associations  such  as  shawms;  the  fipple 
music  of  the  flute  used  in  bawdy  houses  or  the  bagpipes  playing  in  a  Brueghel 
festival  will  not  do.^^  Even  the  musical  notes  and  rhythmic  patterns  will  have 
to  be  distinct,  for  tragedy  involves  a  fabula  that  imposes  special  requirements 
on  all  other  elements  in  a  work.  In  short,  the  ordering  of  all  components  in 
a  tragedy  begins  with  the  plot,  says  Heinsius  in  perfect  tune  with  Aristotle, 
and,  as  the  treatise  is  a  manifesto  proclaiming  plot  to  be  the  "soul"  of  tragedy, 
there  is  nothing  inappropriate  in  Heinsius'  calling  attention  to  the  main  thrust 
of  his  argument  in  the  title. 

It  is,  of  course,  conceivable  that  in  his  title  De  tragoediae  constitutione  Heinsius 
might  have  dropped  a  word  such  as  rerum  on  stylistic  grounds  and  that  what 
he  really  meant  was  in  fact  De  tragoediae  constitutione  rerum  or  actionum.  Were  this 
the  case,  we  still  end  up  with  the  same  meaning.  The  expression  would  point 


PAUL  R.    SELLIN  547 

again  to  fabula  as  the  principal  part  of  tragedy,  not  to  the  "structure"  or  "make- 
up" of  tragedy  in  its  totahty.  An  important  work  by  a  contemporary  of  Hein- 
sius  casts  some  helpful  light  on  the  problem.  If  one  looks  at  G.  J.  Vossius'  De 
artis  poeticae  natura  ac  constitutione  liber  or  his  De  rhetoricae  natura  ac  constitutione , 
it  becomes  immediately  apparent  that  in  these  titles  the  word  constitutio  means 
indeed  the  "make-up"  or  "structure"  of  the  Wissenschaft  at  hand,  for  the  aim 
of  both  works  was  to  offer  a  general  survey  of  each  art,  in  which  the  chief  "pre- 
cepts" are  set  forth  regarding  all  aspects  of  the  subject  under  examination,  in- 
cluding (in  the  case  of  poetics)  all  its  "qualitative"  parts  as  an  art  in  general 
and  its  individual  genres.  However,  when  the  De  artis  poeticae  natura  ac  constit- 
utione liber  gets  around  to  discussing  tragedy  as  a  genre,  the  word  constitutio  re- 
curs, but  this  time  in  a  very  different  and  much  narrower  sense.  That  is,  in 
discussing  the  parts  of  tragedy,  Vossius  also  uses  constitutio  to  refer  specifically 
to  the  first  and  primary  part  of  tragedy  —  that  is,  the  "plot"  or  fabula  of  trag- 
edy. ^^  Constitutio  is  thus  Vossius'  word  foi  plot  too;  in  this  context  it  does  not 
refer  to  the  structure  or  "make-up"  of  tragedy  as  a  whole.  Vossius  borrowed 
much  of  his  material  from  Heinsius,  though  not  always  with  acknowledge- 
ment, and,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  Vossius  read  De  tragoediae  constitutione  in  much 
the  same  way  as  I  do  regarding  the  interpretation  of  the  word  constitutio  as  it 
occurs  in  Heinsius'  argument.*^  Indeed,  Vossius'  use  of  the  word  puts  one  in 
mind  of  John  Milton's  expression  when,  in  discussing  his  poetic  ambitions  as 
a  young  man,  he  talked  about  those  "Dramatick  constitutions"  that  he  had  con- 
sidered undertaking.^^  In  modern  English,  it  seems  to  me,  "plot"  constitutes 
a  perfectly  acceptable  translation  of  the  phenomenon  that  Heinsius,  Vossius, 
and  Milton  seem  to  have  had  in  mind. 

However  much  I  wanted  initially  to  see  Heinsius'  treatise  as  pioneering  mo- 
dern critical  inquiry  into  structure,  I  think  that  to  do  so  is  reading  into  the 
text.  The  difference  between  the  two  concepts  is  not  a  small  one,  and  one  had 
better  think  of  Heinsius'  treatise  as  recovering  and  declaring  the  centrality  of 
plot  as  the  essence  of  tragedy  rather  than  an  attempt  at  structural  or  com- 
positional analysis.  This  in  no  way  belittles  Heinsius.  As  I  have  pointed  out 
elsewhere,  his  great  contribution  to  Aristotelian  criticism  in  the  Renaissance 
was  the  recovery  o{  pathos  as  central  to  the  form  and  end  of  tragedy,  and  to 
arrive  at  this  achievement,  he  had  first  to  come  to  grips  with  and  understand 
the  Aristotelian  notion  of  plot.  ^°  Surely  one  of  the  serious  distortions  that  took 
place  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Poetics  in  the  sixteenth  century  was  that  "fable" 
in  the  sense  of  "myth"  or  "story"  tended  to  get  confused  with  "fable"  in  the  sense 
of  "plot."  As  a  consequence, /a^w/a  too  often  seems  to  come  to  mean  the  nar- 
rative story  from  which  the  "story-line,"  or  "plot"  of  a  play  {or  fabula)  was  taken, 
with  the  result  that  Aristotle's  notion  of  "plot"  as  a  system  of  actions  informing 
tragedy  as  if  it  were  its  "soul"  was  lost  sight  of.  Heinsius  was  most  remarkable 
in  his  success  in  transcending  the  critical  thought  of  his  predecessors,  as  Pro- 
fessor Meter  thinks  too,  and  almost  single-handedly  he  managed  to  recover 


54^  CONSTITUTIO   IN   HEINSIUS'  DE  TRAGOEDIAE  CONSTITUTIONE 

something  very  like  the  theoretical  approach  that  modern  scholars  and  critics 
think  they  fmd  in  the  Poetics}^  In  a  historical  context,  the  title  oi De  tragoediae 
constitutione  and  its  exact  meaning  is  highly  important.  As  Heinsius  himself 
claims,  he  must  be  ranked  among  the  first  really  to  talk  about  "plot"  in  some- 
thing resembling  a  truly  Aristotelian  sense  of  the  word,  for,  even  though  most 
commentators  on  the  Poetics  of  the  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries  pre- 
ceeding  him  throw  the  wordfabula  around  freely,  few  were  talking  about  "plot" 
in  such  a  sense  until  he  came  along  and  restored  it  to  the  central  place  that 
it  occupies  in  Aristotle's  discussion. ^^  Although  we  all  now  realize  that  Hein- 
sius contributed  a  real  and  original  advance  in  thinking  about  Aristotle's  Po- 
etics, the  magnitude  of  his  originality  is  perhaps  just  starting  to  become  clear. 
If,  as  recent  work  in  the  history  of  criticism  is  beginning  to  suggest,  cinque- 
cento  criticism  following  in  the  footsteps  of  Julius  Caesar  Scaliger  did  not  de- 
rive so  much  from  classical  criticism  in  its  golden  age  but  a  much  later 
pre-Patristic  Greek  lore  deriving  from  fourth  and  fifth-century  compilers  like 
Athenaeus  and  Julius  PoUox,  then  Heinsius'  independence  of  mind,  his  ability 
to  free  himself  from  habits  of  thought  inherited  from  his  predecessors,  and  the 
sophistication  of  his  critical  reading,  which  exhibits  almost  a  modern  sensi- 
tivity to  the  entelechy  of  argument  and  the  interconnection  of  Aristotle's  ideas, 
are  dazzling. ^^  To  me,  the  word  constitutio  in  Heinsius'  title  calls  to  mind  his 
intellectual  excellence,  and  I  would  not  want  to  blur  it  with  loose  translations 
of  terms. 

University  of  California,  Los  Angeles 
Free  University,  Amsterdam 


Notes 


1.  Daniel  Heinsius,  On  Plot  in  Tragedy,  trans.  P.  R.  Sellin  and  J.  J.  McManmon 
(Northridge,  California,  1971).  Hereafter  cited  as  S-M. 

2.  Baerbel  Becker-Cantarino,  "On  Plot  in  Tragedy  by  Daniel  Heinsius,"  Daphnis  4  (1975): 
111-12;  J.  H.  Meter,  De  literaire  theori'en  van  Daniel  Heinsius  (Amsterdam,  1975),  pp. 
314-17. 

3.  Pp.  151-  52. 

4.  Ibid.,  p.  151. 

5.  S-M,  19-20;  De  tragoediae  constitutione  (Leiden,  1643),  pp.  21-22  (hereafter  referred 
to  as  43);  De  tragica  constitutione  liber  (Leiden,  1611),  p.  33  (hereafter  referred  to  as  11). 

6.  See  O.  E.  D.,  s.  v.  "Fable." 

7.  E.g.,  S-M,  p.  14  {43,  p.  139;  11,  p.  28);  S-M,  p.  20  {43,  p.  22;  11,  p.  33);  S-M, 
p.  47  {43,  p.  72;  11,  p.  95);  S-M,  p.  59  {43,  p.  83;  11,  p.  115);  S-M,  p.  20  {43,  p. 
22;  11,  p.  34)  respectively. 

8.  Literary  Theories,  p.  151. 


PAUL  R.    SELLIN  549 

9.  SM,  p.  34  {43,  p.  47;  11,  p.  63). 

10.  S-M,  p.  22  (^J,  p.  27;  ii,  p.  39).  Note  especially  the  express  synonymity  of  terms 
("constitutio  seufabula")  at  this  point  in  the  argument. 

11.  S-M,  p.  20  (43,  p.  22;  11,  p.  33). 

12.  Constitutio  also  occurs  by  itself  in  Chapters  4  {S-M,  p.  23;  ^3,  p.  28;  11,  p.  41), 
8  (twice:  S-M,  p.  46;  43,  pp.  69-70;  ii,  pp.  91-92),  9  (twice:  S-M,  pp.  50  &  54;  43, 
pp.  76  &  84;  11,  pp.  99  &  109),  10  {S-M,  p.  57;  43,  p.  87;  11,  p.  112),  14  (5-M,  p. 
93;  43,  p.  144;  11,  p.  175),  and  17  {S-M,  p.  151;  43,  p.  215;  11,  p.  247).  In  every 
case  the  Latin  noun  refers  clearly  to  the  first  and  principal  qualitative  p2irt  of  tragedy. 
In  light  of  the  interchangeability  of  constitutio  and  fabula  cited  in  note  10  above,  the  re- 
lationship between  "plot"  and  "fable"  seems  as  express  and  clear  as  possible.  However, 
when  the  stem  occurs  in  participial  form  (e.g.,  constituta,  43,  p.  36,  and  11,  p.  51),  I 
have  translated  it  as  "constructed"  (p.  27  e.g.). 

13.  S-M,  pp.  20-22. 

14.  Stage  Directions,  Macbeth,  1.6,  7. 

15.  J.  C.  Scaliger,  Poetices  libri  septem,  ed.  A.  Buck  (reprint  Lyons,  1561;  Stuttgart- 
Bad  Cannstatt,  1946),  1.6,  pp.  11-12;  19-20,  p.  30-33. 

16.  Gerardis  Joannis  Vossii  Opera  in  sex  tomos  divisa  (Amsterdam,  1697-1701),  Tome 
III:  Artis  poeticae  natura,  ac  constitutione  liber,  title,  p.  7. 

17.  Ibid.,  Poeticarum  institutionum,  2.8.1  &  5  (pp.  87,  88)  et  passim. 

18.  Although  Vossius  does  not  derive  his  definition  of  tragedy  {Poeticarum  institutio- 
num, 2.11.2,  p.  84)  from  Heinsius,  Book  2,  Chapters  13-15  (particularly  13:  "De  tra- 
goediae  constitutione"),  takes  much  from  Heinsius,  sometimes  almost  word  for  word. 
However,  Vossius  fails  to  credit  him,  probably  because  of  grudges  dating  back  to  the 
Synod  of  Dort. 

19.  The  Reason  of  Church-Government,  in  John  Milton,  Selected  Prose ,  ed.  C.  A.  Patrides 
(Harmond worth:  Penguin  Books,  1974),  p.  56. 

20.  See  Sellin,  "From  Res  to  Pathos:  The  Leiden  'Ordo  Aristotelis'  and  Seventeenth 
Century  Recovery  of  the  Pathetic  in  Interpreting  Aristotle's  Poetics,""  Ten  Studies  in  Anglo- 
Dutch  Relations,  ed.  J.  A.  Van  Dorsten  (Leiden,  1974),  pp.  72-93. 

21.  Meter,  Literary  Theories,  pp.  271-81. 

22.  See  Sellin,  "Le  pathetique  retrouve:  Racine's  Catharsis  Reconsidered,"  MP  70 
(1973):  199-215. 

23.  "Sources  of  Julius  Caesar  Scaliger's  Poetices  libri  septem  as  a  Guide  to  Renaissance 
Poetics,"  Acta  Scaligeriana:  Actes  du  Collogue  International  organise  pour  le  cinquieme  centenaire 
de  la  naissance  de  Jules-Cesar  Scaliger  (Agen,  14-16  septembre  1984),  ed.  J.  Cubelier  and  M. 
Magnien  with  a  Preface  by  Josef  IJsewijn,  Foreword  by  J.  Frangois-Poncet,  and  Post- 
face  by  Alain  Michel  (Recueil  des  travaux  de  la  Societe  Academique  d'Agen,  3rd  Ser- 
ies, vol.  VI;  Agen,  1986),  pp.  75-84. 


La  raccolta  delle  epistole 
di  Antonio  De  Ferrariis  Galateo 

Francesco  Tateo 

Antonio  De  Ferrariis  da  Galatone,  medico  e  umanista,  opero  a  Na- 
poli,  in  relazione  con  i  pontaniani  e  con  la  corte  aragonese,  nell'ul- 
timo  decennio  del  sec.  XV,  ma  visse  prevalentemente  in  Puglia,  la 
sua  terra  d'origine,  prima  e  dopo  questo  periodo  napoletaino  che  certamente 
costitui  il  momento  piu  importante  della  sua  formazione  di  umanista.  Questo 
raggio  particolare  della  sua  esperienza,  cui  bisogna  aggiungere  la  Ferrara  dei 
suoi  studi  giovanili,  e  certo  testimoniato  dal  nome  dei  corrispondenti  e  dai 
motivi  delle  sue  epistole,  dove  si  alterna  il  ricordo  dell'Accademia  pontaniana 
con  I'insistenza  suUa  vita  attuale  condotta  nell'estremo  angolo  dell'Italia^  E 
tuttavia  le  epistole,  come  e  accaduto  qualche  volta,  vanno  lette  nel  contesto 
piu  ampio  dell'Umanesimo,  non  solo  italiano.  L'interesse  per  la  sua  figura  d'in- 
tellettuale  e  di  uomo  di  scienze  e  cresciuto  in  questi  ultimi  vent'anni  per  tre 
fondamentali  ragioni. 

Anzitutto  le  sue  epistole,  pubblicate  per  la  prima  volta  insieme  nel  1959  da 
Antonio  Altamura,  il  quale  utilizzo,  quantunque  parzialmente  e  scorretta- 
mente,  la  silloge  approntata  dallo  stesso  autore^,  corrispondevano  all'attenzio- 
ne  sempre  piia  grande  che  si  andava  rivolgendo,  e  si  rivolge  tuttora,  agli 
epistolari  degli  umanisti^;  tanto  piu  che  rappresentano  in  certo  qual  modo  an- 
ch'esse  un  caso  problematico  (epistole  sparse,  epistole  atipiche,  epistole  con  piu 
redazioni  o  di  dubbia  autenticita)"^.  In  secondo  luogo  le  epistole  del  Galateo, 
gia  utilizzate  per  ricavarne  frammentarie  opinioni  dell'  umanista,  e  occasio- 
nalmente  esaminate  per  estrarvi  dati  biografici  e  cronachistici,  si  sono  andate 
rivelando  come  un  punto  di  riferimento  notevole  per  la  ricerca  intorno  aWa. 
vicenda  culturale  del  Mezzogiorno  d'ltalia,  non  meno  di  alcune  sue  opere  piu 
fortunate,  quali  il  De  situjapygiae,  che  ebbe  un'edizione  a  Basilea  nel  1558  ed 
ha  sollecitato  spesso  I'attenzione  di  archeologi  e  geografi,  o  'i\  De  educationey 
esaminato  da  Benedetto  Croce  nella  prospettiva  dei  rapporti  tra  la  Spagna  e 
la  cultura  italiana.  Inoltre  la  figura  del  Galateo,  vista  da  un  lato  come  appen- 
dice  del  gruppo  accademico  pontaniano,  cui  in  effetti  non  appartiene  in  senso 


552  EPISTOLE  DI  ANTONIO  DE  FERRARIIS  GALATEO 

stretto,  oppure  come  gloria  locale,  studiata  quindi  in  ambito  prevalentemente 
salentino,  dove  vige  una  notevole  continuita  di  ricerca  erudita  dal  Seicento 
airOttocento,  ha  acquistato  uno  spessore  reale  proprio  nella  nuova  prospet- 
tiva  di  studi  suU'  Umanesimo,  che  considera  la  molteplicita  dei  centri  cultu- 
rali  non  solo  nel  contesto  itadiano,  ma  anche  entro  lo  stesso  contesto  meridionale 
monopolizzato  da  Napoli.  Infatti  all'indagine  di  rapporti  e  distanze  fra  uma- 
nesimo napoletano  e  umanesimo  fiorentino  si  va  aggiungendo  I'indagine 
dell'umanesimo  nelle  regioni  periferiche  del  Regno  di  Napoli,  che  postula  un 
rapporto  non  solo  con  I'umanesimo  del  centro  aragonese  e  spagnolo,  ma  anche 
con  il  flusso  culturale  di  altri  centri  italiani,  fra  i  quali  occupa  un  posto  rag- 
guardevole  il  Veneto. 

Ora,  se  I'opera  corografica  sulla  regione  della  lapigia,  I'esegesi  etica  e  de- 
vozionale  del  Pater  noster,  unica  opera  in  volgare  del  Galateo,  e  gli  opuscoli 
medico-fisici  si  collocano  in  una  tradizione  di  studi  a  carattere  monastico  e  scien- 
tifico  propria  del  Mezzogiorno,  contrassegnata  dalla  presenza  araba  e  bizan- 
tina,  le  epistole  testimoniano,  fra  la  confessione  autobiografica  e  la  polemica 
culturale,  la  consapevolezza  delle  sue  scelte.  Ben  diversa  dall'opera  degli  amici 
Pontano  e  Sannazaro,  in  cui  ha  gran  parte  la  poesia  e  la  corrispondenza  epi- 
stolare  e  ridotta  oppure  occasionale,  I'opera  del  Galateo  si  presenta  con  la  cen- 
tralita  delle  sue  epistole  fondate  su  modelli  greci  e  latini  non  prevalenti  nella 
piu  tipica  epistolografia  umanistica.  II  loro  carattere  sentenzioso  ed  alieno  sia 
dal  sermo  cotidianus,  sia  dall'eloquenza  ciceroniana,  con  la  tendenza  a  tradurre 
I'occasione  di  vita  in  motivo  di  riflessione  filosofica  e  morale,  appare  program- 
maticamente  polemica  nei  confronti  della  cultura  dell'epistolografia  qu2ile  ge- 
nere  di  eloquenza. 

Un  terzo  motivo  della  crescita  d'interesse  per  I'opera  del  Galateo  ci  consente 
di  toccare  anche  il  problema  piu  importante  per  il  futuro  editore  delle  sue  epi- 
stole, cioe  il  senso  della  silloge  curata  dallo  stesso  autore,  delle  scelte  e  delle 
esclusioni  da  lui  presumibilmente  operate.  II  De  Ferrariis,  osservatore  della 
guerra  di  Otranto  del  1480-81,  cioe  di  quell'episodio  rimasto  a  testimoniare 
la  minaccia  dei  Turchi  e  la  difesa  dell'occidente  cristiano,  va  riconosciuto  come 
il  piu  efficace  artefice  della  storia  della  caduta  della  citta  di  Otranto  intesa 
come  "martirio,"  ossia  come  sacrificio  di  tutto  un  popolo  per  la  fede^.  L'inte- 
resse  recente  per  questa  vicenda  rappresentativa  della  crisi  del  mondo  latino 
e  strettamente  connessa  con  le  aspirazioni  di  rinnovamento  religioso  ed  umano, 
e  quindi  con  il  senso  diffuso  del  decadimento  della  Chiesa  e  della  responsa- 
bilita  dei  cristiani,  con  I'incertezza  politica  di  fronte  2illa  sorte  degli  stati  ita- 
liani, riconduce  alia  ribalta  I'umanista  di  Gsdatone.  Egli,  infatti,  per  un  verso 
e  calato  nella  realta  locale,  salentina,  ed  esprime  i  timori  diffusi  in  quella  re- 
gione cosi  esposta  al  pericolo  turco,  avvertendo  con  particolare  sensibilita  il 
rischio  cui  e  esposta  I'eredita  culturale  bizantina,  per  I'altro  verso  partecipa 
del  clima  di  renovatio  che  caratterizza  i  pontificati  di  Giulio  II  e  di  Leone  X 
con  I'esaltazione  del  martirio  cristiano  e  con  gli  umori  polemici  sottesi  cil  suo 


FRANCESCO  TATEO  553 

commento  dell'orazione  domenicale  e  al  dialogo  Heremita^.  Non  per  altro  le 
due  opere  del  Galateo  apparvero  a  taluno  perfino  proiettate  verso  sentimenti 
di  riforma,  e  possono  comunque  assumersi  come  il  segno  dell'inquietudine  da 
cui  scaturira  la  rivolta  antiromana. 

In  effetti,  proprio  la  silloge  epistolare  del  Galateo,  che  include  una  lettera 
diretta  a  Giulio  II  in  cui  si  conferma  la  validita  della  donazione  di  Costantino, 
che  contiene  inoltre  un  elogio  di  Leone  X  inserito  in  un'epistola  che  discute 
il  rapporto  fra  le  lettere  e  il  potere,  e  ripropone  un'epistola  dedicata  ad  un  pro- 
getto  di  pellegrinaggio  a  Gerus2ilemme  in  compagnia  di  umanisti  fra  i  quali 
il  Sannazaro,  futuro  cantore  della  nascita  di  Cristo  come  recupero  della  storia 
evangelica  e  dei  luoghi  sacri,  accoglieva  anche  I'esaltazione  di  Ferdinando  il 
Cattolico  quale  vincitore  dei  Turchi  a  Tripoli  e  difensore  della  fede  e  del  mondo 
cristiano  contro  la  barbaric  orientale^. 

Certo  le  epistole  del  Galateo  non  possono  considerarsi  unilateralmente  sotto 
I'aspetto  politico-religioso  o  legate  a  motivi  occasionali.  II  problema  e  quello 
di  individuare  il  "senso"  della  raccolta,  sia  perche  I'autore  non  segue,  nel  rac- 
cogliere  le  epistole,  I'ordine  cronologico,  sia  perche  puo  sembrare  che  egli  non 
abbia  completato  il  suo  lavoro.  II  problema  e  dunque  di  ordine  interpretativo 
e  di  ordine  filologico,  riguarda  cioe,  oltre  la  ricerca  delle  ragioni  che  hanno 
guidato  la  silloge,  il  criterio  cui  attenersi  nell'allestire  una  moderna  edizione. 
II  ms.  Vat.  lat.  7584  contiene  39  lettere,  per  la  maggior  parte  autografe.  La 
calligrafia  dell'autore,  come  quella  di  coloro  che  in  qualche  caso  si  alternarono 
con  lui,  denota  I'intento  di  offrire  una  bella  copia  e  di  costruire  una  silloge  or- 
dinata.  L'esigua  presenza  di  mani  diverse^  non  permette  che  si  pensi  al  con- 
corso  di  una  volonta  estranea,  tanto  piu  che  il  Galateo  ha  postillato  anche 
le  lettere  non  scritte  di  suo  pugno.  Sennonche  alcuni  dati  non  facilmente  spie- 
gabili  hanno  fatto  pensare  ad  una  copia  non  defmitiva^.  Cio  significa  che  le 
otto  epistole  non  presenti  nel  Vaticano  e  presenti  in  altre  raccolte  minori,  pub- 
blicate  dall'Altamura  di  seguito  a  quelle  dell'autografo,  e  quella  isolata  recen- 
temente  rinvenuta'^,  avrebbero  potuto  trovar  posto  nella  raccolta  dell'autore, 
qualora  egli  avesse  potuto  portare  a  termine  il  lavoro  di  trascrizione. 

L'editore,  ovviamente,  non  avra  altra  scelta,  alio  stato  attuale  delle  cono- 
scenze,  che  quella  di  seguire  I'ordine  e  rispettare  i  limiti  segnati  dal  codice  auto- 
grafo,  aggiungendo  a  parte  le  epistole  non  inclusevi,  e  discutendo  semmai  se 
alcune  di  esse  possano  considerarsi  delle  epistole,  come  quella  intitolata  Al- 
phonsi  I  epitaphium  e  quella  diretta  a  Gelasio  De  nobilitate.  Ma  attribuire  I'esclu- 
sione  della  prima  al  fatto  che  si  tratti  di  un  "epitaffio"  perche  e  rivolta  al  re 
scomparso  e  prende  lo  spunto  dall'epigrafe  concepita  per  essere  posta  sulle  rive 
dello  lonio,  e  I'esclusione  della  seconda  al  fatto  che  si  tratti  propriamente  di 
un  "trattato,"^^  non  aiuta  ad  intendere  la  silloge  approntata  dal  Galateo,  che 
presuppone  una  scelta  non  dovuta  a  ragioni  formali,  le  quali  avrebbero  pro- 
babilmente  indotto  I'autore  ad  includere  altre  autentiche  "epistole,"  rimaste  in- 
vece  fuori  del  ms.  vaticano. 


554  EPISTOLE  DI  ANTONIO  DE  FERRARIIS  GALATEO 

Bisogna  in  effetti  riconoscere  che  il  Galateo  tratto  il  genere  epistolare  con 
una  note  vole  varieta.  Le  stesse  epistole  raccolte  dall'autore  presentano  ora  il 
carattere  della  dedicatoria,  ora  la  brevita  della  missiva  d'occasione  (un  av- 
venimento  o  I'invio  d'un  testo  allegato),  ora  I'ampiezza  di  una  dissertazione. 
E'  veramente  ozioso  attribuire  molta  importanza  alia  denominazione  dello 
scritto,  dal  momento  che  anche  opuscoli  comunemente  considerati  come  trat- 
tatelli  {De  podagra,  De  educatione)  nascono  come  epistole  e  si  conformano  secondo 
il  procedimento  discorsivo  dell'oratoria  epistolare  o  dell'informazione  erudita, 
piuttosto  che  secondo  il  procedimento  sistematico  o  dialettico.  Anche  il  cosid- 
detto  Epitaffio  ad  Alfonso  e  un'epistola  a  tutti  gli  effetti,  quantunque  diretta 
ad  un  estinto,  un'epistola  immaginaria,  ma  con  uno  sviluppo  tematico  simile 
alle  altre.  La  misura  del  De  nobilitate  si  ritrova  poi  perfettamente  nelle  epistole 
della  silloge  (il  De  dignitate  disciplinarum  ha  il  medesimo  sviluppo)  e  la  mancanza 
di  una  formula  di  saluto  fmale  puo  ben  dipendere  proprio  dalla  trasmissione 
separata  dell'epistola  (pervenutaci  non  autografa),  che  lo  stesso  titolo,  codificato 
dal  genere,  ha  savucito. 

Se  pensiamo  invece  che  lo  scritto  in  onore  di  Alfonso  poteva  risultare  ana- 
cronistico,  e  chissa  forse  poco  conveniente  nel  1514,  che  e  il  termine  a  quo 
della  raccolta  galateana  dove  le  ultime  lettere  in  ordine  cronologico  possono 
essere  datate  intorno  a  quell'anno;  se  pensiamo  che  e  rimasta  fuori  della  sil- 
loge anche  una  lettera  di  dedica  a  Federico,  dove  questi  e  apostrofato  come 
re,  e  il  discorso  e  tutto  incentrato  suUa  differenza  fra  chi  impera  e  chi  svolge 
il  ruolo  subalterno  dell'intellettuale;  se  pensiamo  che  il  De  nobilitate  conteneva 
gravissime  accuse  alia  nobilta  e  si  concludeva  con  una  requisitoria  contro  i 
Francesi  e  una  pesante  allusione  agli  attuali  signori  stranieri  ("polemizziamo 
con  i  morti  e  non  nominiamo  gli  attuali  dominatori  dell'Italia"  —  qualunque 
sia  I'obiettivo  di  queste  parole  —  la  datazione  dell'epistola  rimane  del  resto  in- 
certa  e  le  date  proposte  non  hanno  alcun  fondamento  oggettivo);  bisognera 
orientarsi  per  un'interpretazione  della  silloge  come  opera  destinata  alia  pub- 
blicazione  e  consentanea  al  clima  di  quegli  anni.  Sarebbe  la  prima  volta  che 
il  Gadateo  s'impegna  in  questo  senso,  sia  per  il  carattere  generalmente  occa- 
sionale  e  libellistico  degli  altri  suoi  scritti,  sia  per  la  mancanza  — lo  dice  chia- 
ramente  nell'epistola  al  Leoniceno  — di  una  valida  industria  tipografica  nella 
provincia  pugliese^^. 

Proprio  rispetto  ad  un  disegno  organico  potrebbe  acquistare  un  senso  I'e- 
sclusione  delle  altre  sei  epistole  stravaganti.  Tutte  anteriori  all'aillestimento  della 
silloge,  potrebbero  anch'esse  spiegarsi  con  I'anacronismo  o  con  la  scarsa  fun- 
zionalita'^.  E'  possibile  che  il  Galateo  si  riservasse  d'intervenire  ancora  sul 
testo  con  qualche  ampliamento  o  spostamento,  ma  non  e  possibile  conside- 
rare  questa  una  raccolta  prowisoria.  TEinto  meno  e  fondato  ipotizzare  una 
stesura  successiva  al  codice  vaticano.  Questa  ipotesi,  avanzata  recentemente 
per  un'epistola,  la  cosiddetta  Vituperatio  litterarum,  sulla  base  del  fatto  che  un 
ramo  della  tradizione  recepisce  tutte  la  aggiunte  marginali  e  le  correzioni  del 


FRANCESCO  TATEO  555 

Vat.,  tramandando  tre  passi  in  piu  e  alcune  lezioni  diverse,  non  e  sufficien- 
temente  fondata  dal  momento  che  le  lezioni  diverse  si  rivelano  ad  un'attenta 
lettura  tutte  errori  o  banalizzazioni,  e  i  tre  passi  in  piu  recuperati  sono  presenti 
come  aggiunte  sull'autografo  che  possediamo,  quantunque  non  piii  leggibili^'^. 
Ma,  a  parte  queste  ragioni,  e  I'esame  interno  della  raccolta,  la  sua  struttura 
solo  apparentemente  disordinata,  a  confermare  il  carattere  chiuso  e  definitive 
di  essa,  in  attesa  di  altri  dati. 

La  prima  epistola,  quella  piia  carica  di  citazioni  da  San  Girolamo  e  non  a 
caso  dedicata  ad  una  nobildonna,  Maria  di  Portogaillo,  contiene  un  elogio  della 
virtuale  santita  della  donna  e  una  condanna  dei  mali  piu  gravi  del  secolo, 
I'ipocrisia  e  I'adulazione,  ma  rivela  anche  qualche  tratto  programmatico,  quando 
I'umanista  conclude  dichiarando  la  propria  sincerita  e  difendendo  suUa  scorta 
di  Girolamo  il  proprio  impeto  polemico  e  alio  stesso  tempo  la  prudenza  usata 
ad  evitare  accuse  personali,  e  opponendo  quindi  la  virtii  della  giusta  simu- 
lazione  a  vizio  dell'ipocrisia.  La  raccolta  si  conclude  con  un'immagine  negativa 
del  mondo  dilaniato  dagli  odi  e  dalle  guerre,  dove  c'e  ancora  posto  per  la  sa- 
tira  contro  la  simulatio  e  la  dissimulatio. 

Fra  questi  due  estremi  si  possono  riconoscere  dei  blocchi  pressoche  omo- 
genei,  entro  i  quali  alcuni  accostamenti  riflettono  anche  circostanze  scarsa- 
mente  significative:  epistole  collegate  dal  nome  del  destinatario  e  dal  riferimento 
ad  una  questione  particolare  che  hanno  in  comune  (VI  e  VII,  XVII  e  XVIII, 
XXIII  e  XXIV),  o  dall'essere  state  scritte  nello  stesso  luogo,  nel  medesimo 
torno  di  tempo  (XXXVI  e  XXXVII).  Un  blocco  omogeneo  possono  consi- 
derarsi  le  prime  sette  epistole  dedicate  a  temi  etici,  che  implicano  il  problema 
della  responsabilita  dell'uomo  di  lettere  e  che  sfociano  nella  questione  del  rap- 
porto  fra  armi  e  lettere  con  al  centro  la  IV  epistola  (Apologeticon),  in  cui  e  de- 
finite I'impegno  fondamentalmente  morale  dello  scrittore,  schierato  contro  i 
grammatici  per  un  linguaggio  delle  cose:  "Atticissent  qui  veUnt,  nos  loquamur 
ut  liber." 

II  blocco  successive,  di  quindici  epistole,  apparentemente  piu  composite  e 
forse  dominate  dai  ricerdi  del  soggiorne  napoletane,  si  apre  con  I'elogio  del 
governo  e  della  nobilta  veneziana  e  si  conclude  con  i  censigli  a  Bona  Sferza 
suUa  specifica  educazione  di  chi  e  destinate  al  potere.  A  queste  tema  fa  ece 
la  breve  lettera  a  Prespere  Colonna  e  funge  da  supporte  ideologico  la  lettera 
sulla  nobilta,  la  XIV,  al  centre  della  serie.  Una  piu  evidente  intenziene  di 
raggruppamente  tematico  e  visibile  nel  blocco  delle  epistole  XXIII-XXVI, 
che  registrane  la  paura  per  il  pericolo  turco  e  si  cencludene  con  la  lettera  a 
Ferdinande  il  Cattelice  per  la  cenquista  di  Tripoli.  Del  medesimo  gruppo  fa 
parte  la  bella  lettera  a  Crisestemo  Colonna  sull'accademia  leccese,  sulla  vita 
ritirata  degli  studi,  evidentemente  perche  include  anch'essa,  quantunque  di 
sfuggita,  la  menzione  dei  Turchi.  L'ultima  serie  vede  a  piu  riprese  affrentato 
il  problema  della  validita  delle  lettere,  e  riaffermato  il  principie  della  supe- 
riority delVeruditio  sulYeloquentia. 


556  EPISTOLE  DI  ANTONIO  DE  FERRARIIS  GALATEO 

Al  di  la  di  questi  blocchi  tematici,  di  per  se  significativi,  e  possibile  in- 
dividuare  un  piu  sottile  disegno,  cui  accennero  soltanto,  perche  la  sua  de- 
finizione  implicherebbe  un  esame  particolareggiato  del  contenuti  ideologici. 
Nella  successione  delle  epistole  colpiscono  alcuni  evidenti  richiami  ad  argo- 
menti  classic!  della  trattazione  etica.  La  seconda  epistola  tocca  il  problema  della 
societa  umana  in  confronto  con  quella  dei  bruti  e  della  varieta  dei  tempe- 
ramenti.  Spiccano  successivamente  il  problema  dei  limiti  della  conoscenza  na- 
turale  (III),  quello  dello  stile  e  del  disprezzo  della  gloria  (IV  e  V),  che  definiscono 
il  programma  culturale  del  Galateo.  In  seguito,  dal  problema  fondamentale 
del  rapporto  fra  armi  e  lettere,  che  adombra  quello  fra  vita  attiva  e  contem- 
plativa,  si  passano  ad  illustrare  le  virtu  dell'animo  contrapposte  alia  barbaric, 
in  un  discorso  che  s'intreccia  con  la  difesa  della  civilta  greca  e  latina  (la  lode 
dei  Veneziani  e  di  Ermolao  Barbaro),  con  il  mito  di  Gerusalemme  quale  meta 
ideale  del  gruppo  degli  umanisti  napoletani,  con  la  funzione  consolatrice  ed 
educatrice  delle  lettere  (la  lettera  a  Ferdinando  duca  di  Calabria  sottolinea  il 
ruolo  della  cultura  nell'educazione  del  principe  e  ricorda  le  lettere  di  Aristotele 
a  Filippo)  e  col  problema  della  felicita,  di  cui  e  simbolo  il  Pontano,  con  la 
lode  dell'amicizia  come  scampo  dalla  fortuna  ("hoc  solum  restat  quod  non  sur- 
ripuit  fortuna")  e  fondamento  della  conversazione  civile,  cui  si  affianca  e  si  op- 
pone  la  lode  della  solitudine  serena  e  fruttuosa,  ambedue  (amicizia  e  solitudine) 
coUegate  con  la  figura  del  Sannazaro.  II  discorso  s'intreccia  infme  con  I'elogio 
della  temperanza  (riferito  a  Prospero  Colonna)  e  delle  virtii  morali  del  prin- 
cipe, donde  il  ricordo  della  lettera  di  Isocrate  a  Demonico,  tradotta  da  Ga- 
briele  Altilio  e  proposta  a  Ferrandino  principe  di  Campania  (ep.  XXI)  e  il 
catalogo  delle  virtu  morali  proposto  a  Bona  Sforza  {lustitia,  liberalitas,  demen- 
tia, modestia,  gratitudo,  sapientia,  innocentia,  patientia,  Veritas,  integritas,  fides,  benig- 
nitas,  ep.  XXII). 

Si  potra  dunque  riconoscere  nella  serie  successiva  delle  epistole  dedicate  al 
pericolo  turco  lo  sviluppo  di  un  altro  tema  classico  dell'epica,  quale  Vimma- 
nitas.  Nell'epistola  a  Ferdinando  vincitore  dei  Turchi  I'analogia  fra  la  divinita 
e  la  regia  maiestas  e  I'apostrofe  al  magnanimo  sovrano  riveleranno  il  loro  senso 
etico,  a  prescindere  dal  significato  encomiastico.  Nelle  epistole  su  Fieramosca 
e  la  disfida  di  Barletta  si  cogliera  il  riferimento  allafortitudo,  nell'epistola  con- 
tro  Valla  I'esplicito  riferimento  alia  empietas,  nella  lettera  successiva  la  condanna 
della  voluptas  epicurea,  e  nell'altra  ancora  I'esaltazione  della  giustizia  e  della 
prudenza,  virtu  intellettive,  contro  le  forze  sfrenate  del  corpo  e  dell'animo, 
audacia  e  ferocia. 

E'  evidente  in  questo  percorso  la  traccia  segnata  dd\Y Etica  nicomachea,  di  cui 
ricorrono  i  temi  essenziali.  Ma  I'importanza  del  libro  aristotelico  nella  strut- 
turazione  della  raccolta  epistolare  del  Galateo  e  confermata  dalle  ultime  epi- 
stole, dove  I'umanista  intreccia  la  testimonianza  della  propria  vocazione  di 
scrittore  morale  rivolto  alia  conoscenza  del  mondo  e  degli  uomini,  e  quindi 
la  dimostrazione  della  superiorita  della  scienza  pratica  suUe  vane  lettere,  con 


FRANCESCO  TATEO  557 

la  delineazione  della  citta  ideale  contrapposta  alia  barbaric  e  2illa  dissoluzione 
provocata  dall'odio  e  dall'avidita  di  dominio. 

UEtica  nicomachea  si  concludeva  con  il  problema  della  societa  perfetta  e  della 
vita  contemplativa.  II  famoso  codice  miniato  d^WEtica  fatto  allestire  da  An- 
drea Matteo  Acquaviva^^,  fratello  di  Belisario,  protettore  e  corrispondente  del 
Galateo  oltre  che  amico  dei  pontaniani,  illustrava  il  decimo  libro  con  la  figura 
della  citta  ideale,  con  Timmagine  del  sapiente  ed  i  simboli  delle  scienze  umane. 
II  Galateo,  dopo  le  epistole  che  riconfermano  la  validita  del  bene  agere  sul  bene 
dicerey  inserisce  I'epistola  de  neophitis,  che  esalta,  in  occasione  di  una  difesa  degli 
ebrei,  I'antica  societa  ebraica  governata  da  leggi  divine,  quindi  I'epistola  in 
cui  e  rappresentata  Gallipoli  come  citta  ideale  (la  Callipolis  descriptio,  ep. 
XXXVI,  va  infatti  oltre  le  originarie  intenzioni  corografiche)^^  e  quella,  piu 
occasionale,  sulla  civilta  fiorentina  (ep.  XXXVII),  concludendo  con  due  epi- 
stole dedicate  I'una  alia  ferocia  del  duello  e  I'altra  aUe  immani  guerre  per  il 
predominio  in  Italia,  scritte  durante  lo  scontro  fra  Francesi  e  Spagnuoli  in- 
torno  al  1501-1503.  Una  scelta  che  non  avrebbe  senso,  questa,  nel  momento 
in  cui  il  Galateo  raccoglie  le  epistole,  se  non  pensassimo  zille  esigenze  di  un 
discorso  morale  fatto  in  parallelo,  sia  pure  nella  forma  diversa  dell'epistolario, 
con  I'opera  aristotelica  del  Pontano  e  di  Andrea  Matteo  Aquaviva. 


Note 


1.  Un  profile  dell'umanista  ho  ripubblicato  in  Chierici  efeudatari  del  Mezzogiorno ,  La- 
terza,  Bari  1984,  pp.  3-20,  dove  e  riportata  la  bibliografia  recente. 

2.  A.  De  Ferrariis  Galateo,  Epistole,  edizione  critica  a  cura  di  A.  Altamura,  Centre 
di  studi  salentini,  Lecce  1959.  II  ms.  Vat.  lat.  7584,  in  massima  parte  autografo,  fu  per 
la  prima  volta  utilizzato  da  A.  Mai,  Spicilegium  Romanum,  typis  Collegii  Urbani,  Romae 
1842. 

3.  Cfr.  L.  Gualdo  Rosa,  La  pubblicazione  degli  epistolari  umanistici,  in  "Bullettino  del- 
ristituto  storico  italiano  per  il  Medio  Evo  e  Archivio  Muratoriano,"  89  (1980-81),  pp. 
369-92. 

4.  Una  buona  ricognizione  bibliografica,  corredata  dalla  rassegna  delle  varie  opi- 
nioni  intorno  agli  scritti  del  Galateo  e  il  Catalogo  delle  opere  di  A.  De'  Ferrariis  (Galateo) 
di  P.  Andrioli  Nemola,  Milella,  Lecce  1982.  Cfr.  un'interessante  messa  a  punto  di  A. 
Laporta,  Nuoviframmenti galateani,  in  "Nuovi  orientamenti,"  n.  91,  XV  (1955),  pp.  3-6. 
che  avanza  ragionevoli  dubbi  suH'autenticit^  deU'epistola  recentemente  venuta  alia  luce 
(per  cui  vedi  la  nostra  nota  10). 

5.  Cfr.  Gli  umanisti  e  la  guerra  otrantina.  Testi  dei  secoli  XV  e  XVI,  a  cura  di  L.  Gualdo 
Rosa,  I.  Nuovo  e  D.  DefiHppis,  introduzione  di  F.  Tateo,  Dedalo,  Bari  1982. 

6.  II  dialogo  e  stato  riedito  da  E.  Garin  in  Prosatori  latini  del  Quattrocento,  Riccardo 
Ricciardi  ed.,  Milano-Napoli,  1952.  Del  commento  al  Pater  noster,  ancora  consegnato 
ad  un'imperfetta  edizione  ottocentesca  (nella  "CoUana  di  opere  scelte  edite  e  inedite  di 


558  EPISTOLE  DI  ANTONIO  DE  FERRARIIS  GALATEO 

scrittori  di  Terra  d'Otranto,"  diretta  da  S.  Grande,  Tip.  ed.  Salentina,  Lecce  1875), 
e  prossima  la  pubblicazione  di  una  edizione  critica  a  cura  di  A.  Jurilli,  del  quale  cfr. 
L'Esposizione  del  "Pater  noster" di  A.  G.:  note  per  un'edizione  critica,  in  "Quademi  dell'Istituto 
nazionzile  di  studi  sul  Rinascimento  meridionale,"  Presso  I'lstituto,  Napoli  1984,  pp. 
51-73. 

7.  Cfr.  rispettivamente  le  Epistole  XXX,  XXXIII,  IX,  XXVI  (la numerazione  segue 
I'edizione  deH'Altamura,  cit.,  alia  quale  ci  atterremo). 

8.  Nell'epistola  XXVI  la  mano  dell'autore  e  riconoscibile  solo  nei  primi  cinque  righi; 
la  mano  dell'epistola  XXVII  pare  la  stessa  che  ha  fmito  di  copiare  la  precedente.  Ad 
un'altra  mano  —  mi  pare  —  si  deve  la  trascrizione  dell'epistola  XXXI  e  ad  un'altra  an- 
cora  quella  dell'epistolla  XXXIX,  che  e  I'ultima. 

9.  Due  epistole  (XX,  XXI)  sono  ripetute,  a  distanza  di  venti  fogli,  con  alcune  va- 
rianti;  alcune  carte  bianche,  incluse  nel  codice,  parrebbero  destinate  ad  essere  riempite 
successivamente;  I'ultima  epistola  di  mano  del  Galateo  (XXXVIII  dell'intera  silloge) 
e  incompleta,  concludendosi  con  una  parola  lasciata  a  meta.  L'ultima  epistola  del  co- 
dice,  recante  la  scritta  telos,  e,  come  e  stato  gia  detto,  di  altra  mano  e  segue  la  pre- 
cedente dopo  alcune  carte  bianche,  nelle  quali  si  presume  che  dovesse  essere  trascritto 
almeno  il  resto  dell'epistola  rimasta  incompleta. 

10.  G.  VaUone,  Per  A.  De' Ferrariis  detto  il  Galateo:  un  inedito,  una  data,  in  "Giorn.  stor. 
d.  letter,  ital.,"  CLX  (1983),  pp.  575-86. 

11.  Cfr.  Andrioli  Nemola,  Catalogo  .  .  .  ,  cit.,  pp.  188  sgg. 

12.  Epistola  XXVII:  "Ego  tibi  aliquid  ex  mea  officina  mittam,  si  per  impressores 
licebit,  quorum  hie  magna  est  inopia"  (ed.  Altamura,  p.  168). 

13.  \J^^\sto\di  Ad Loysium  Palatinum  (XLIII)  annuncia  il  lavoro  corograifico  del  De  situ 
Japygiae  concluso  nel  1514,  c\ae\\a.  Ad  Actium  Sincerum  de  morte  Pontani  (XLIV)  e  una  sem- 
plice  testimonianza,  non  si  sviluppa  come  I'altra  sul  medesimo  argomento  (XV)  in  una 
ampia  riflessione  morale  sulla  decadenza  dei  tempi  e  sulla  felicita  esemplare  del  mae- 
stro napoletano.  L'epistola  Ad  Antonium  de  Caris  (XL VI),  vescovo  di  Nardo,  accom- 
pagnava  il  carme  perduto  su  Santa  Cesarea  ed  accusava  quella  stravaganza  poetica 
("sapientiae  quaedam  species  est  aliquando  insanisse")  come  incongrua  con  gli  interessi 
e  I'indole  piu  autentici  del  Galateo,  sebbene  con  questo  carme  I'umanista  potesse  di- 
mostrare  la  sua  devozione  e  far  dimenticare  I'impertinenza  del  dialogo  Heremita.  Fatto 
sta  che  anche  l'epistola  al  vescovo  di  Lecce  (XL VIII),  con  cui  veniva  giustificata  la  dura 
satira  del  dialogo,  non  compare  nella  silloge:  U  Galateo  escludeva  ogni  riferimento  alia 
sua  opera  di  autore  di  carmi  efabellae.  L'epistola  al  Castriota,  che  accompagnava  il  De 
educatione,  (XLVII)  e  l'epistola  al  Barbaro  per  I'invio  di  Plinio  (cfr.  n.  10)  non  superano 
i  limiti  della  dedicatoria  celebrativa.  La  presenza  di  due  epistole,  una  diretta  a  Fer- 
dinando,  ultimo  rampollo  degli  Aragonesi  di  Napoli  morto  in  una  dorata  prigionia  in 
Spagna  (epistole  X),  I'altra  all'en  ce  Ferrandino,  non  puo  essere  argomento  contrario 
alia  ragione  dell'anacronismo  avanzata  per  spiegare  I'esclusione  di  alcune  epistole.  II 
Galateo  trovava  forse  il  modo  di  elogiare  indirettamente,  attraverso  quelle  due  epistole, 
la  monarchia  aragonese,  ma  certo  recuperava,  anche  mediante  la  menzione  dell'  at- 
tivita  di  Crisostomo  Colonna  e  di  Gabriele  Altilio,  il  tema  dell'educazione  intellettuale 
del  principe  e  della  funzione  del  chierico. 

14.  Per  questa  ipotesi  cfr.  P.  Andrioli  Nemola,  Non  tre  ma  died  i  manoscritti  della  "Vit- 
uperatio  litterarum  di  A.  G.,  in  "Giorn.  stor.  d.  letter,  ital.,"  CLXI  (1984),  pp.  544-71, 
e  Per  un'edizione  critica  della  "Vituperatio  litterarum,  "in  "Critica  letteraria,"  XII  (1984),  pp. 
441-474.  Rimandando  ad  altra  sede  I'esame  accurate  del  problema,  mi  limitero  a  no- 
tare  che  il  cod.  avellinese,  indicato  dalla  Andrioli  con  la  siglai4&  e  ritenuto  depositario 
di  una  redazione  d'autore  successiva  a  quella  testimoniata  dal  Vat.  lat.  7584,  rivela  pa- 


FRANCESCO  TATEO 


559 


recchi  interventi  che  peggiorano  il  testo,  o  che  per  lo  meno  sono  sospetti.  Si  vedano 
le  tabelle  a  p.  455-56  del  saggio  Per  un'edizione  cit.  Infatti  non  possiamo  considerare  inte- 
ressanti  lectiones  singulares  o  varianti  significative,  ma  semplicemente  degli  errori,  per 
limitarmi  ai  casi  piu  evidenti,  ita  dii  bene  me  amant  (a  fronte  di  ita  deus  bene  me  amet  o 
[  .  .  .  ]  dii[  .  .  .  ]  ament),  regi  (a  fronte  di  bene  regi),  mortis  liberavit  (a  fronte  di  morte  li- 
beravit),  in  utraque  parte  (a  fronte  di  in  utramque partem),  penis  exilii  (a  fronte  di  poenis,  exi- 
liis),  ne  [  .  .  .  ]  quidem  scribere  [  .  .  .  ]  nesciant  volo  (a  fronte  di  ne  .  .  .  quidem  scribere  .  .  . 
sciant  volo),  valebat  (a  fronte  di  valebit),  Bibliothecam  suam  et  graecorum  et  latinorum  libros  os- 
tendit  (a  fronte  di  bibliothecam  [  .  .  .  ]  librorum  ostendit).  Viene  cosi  profondamente  in- 
taccata  la  qualita  di  codice  "estremamente  corretto"  attribuita  al  ms.  avellinese  Tafuri 
63,  le  cui  varianti,  a  parte  gli  errori  di  cui  ho  indicata  solo  una  parte,  dimostrano  ten- 
tativi  di  miglioramento  di  assai  dubbia  natura  e  difficilmente  attribuibili  all'autore.  Si 
vedano  alcuni  casi,  segnalati  dalla  Andrioli  Nemola  fra  quelli  che  dimostrerebbero  una 
revisione  da  parte  dell'autore:  rei  militaris  (per  rei  bellicae),  super  nos  (per  supra  nos)  sono 
pignolerie  classicistiche  inconsuete  nel  Galateo;  quos  cibos  (per  cibos  quos)  nella  frase  "boni 
succi  cibos,  quos  euchimos  Graeci  dicunt,  benevolentibus  utiles,  malevolentibus  insa- 
lubres  esse  experimur"  e  un  maldestro  accomodamento  dettato  da  ragioni  formali,  che 
si  risolve  in  un  guasto  {boni  succi  rimarrebbe  sospeso  ed  experimur  sensa  il  suo  oggetto); 
cognoscere  causas  (per  contemnere  causas)  e  una  svista  di  chi  ha  inteso  ripristinare  il  verso 
virgiliano  {Georg.  II  490)  non  awedendosi  che  esso  era  stato  volutamente  modificato 
dair  autore,  come  si  rileva  dal  contesto.  Quanto  al  problema  piu  grave  (alio  stato  delle 
attuali  conoscenze  non  risolubile),  dei  passi  che  figurano  in  piu  nel  ms.  avellinese,  non 
si  puo  sfuggire  alia  supposizione  che  essi  riproducano  altrettanti  passi  aggiunti  nel  Vat. , 
dove  due  di  essi  sono  cancellati  ma  lasciano  intravedere  qualche  lettera  riconoscibile, 
ed  uno  manca,  ma  in  corrispondenza  di  un  segno  di  richiamo  che  fa  pensare  ad  un 
foglietto  aggiunto  e  andato  perdu  to.  La  cancellatura  del  Vat.  risulterebbe  cosi  poste- 
riore  alia  trascrizione  dell'avellinese.  Rimane  aperto,  ovviamente,  il  quesito  circa  la  pa- 
ternita  della  cancellatura. 

15.  Su  questo  codice,  conservato  nella  Biblioteca  nazionale  di  Vienna  (Vindob.  phil. 
gr.  2)  cfr.  J.  Hermann,  Miniaturhandschriften  aus  der  Bibliothek  des  Herzogs  Andrea  Matteo 
III  Acquaviva,  in  "Jahrbuch  der  Kunsthistorischen  Sammlungen  des  allerhochsten  Kai- 
serhauses,"  XIX  (1898),  pp.  147-216,  e  il  mio  intervento  al  Convegno  su  Monopoli  nel- 
I'etd  del  Rinascimento,  ed.  Schena,  Fasano  1986.  L'illustrazione  del  1.  X  d^iVEtica  e 
riprodotta  in  Libri  e  lettori  nel  mondo  bizantino,  guida  storica  e  critica  a  cura  di  G.  Ca- 
vallo,  Laterza,  Bari  1982. 

16.  Sulle  complesse  motivazioni  dell'opera  corografica  del  Galateo  cfr.  D.  Defilip- 
pis,  L'edizione  basileense  e  la  tradizione  manoscritta  del  De  situ  Japygiae  diA.  De  Ferrariis  Gal- 
ateo, in  "Quaderni  dell'Istituto  naz.  di  studi  sul  Kinase,  merid.,"  cit.,  pp.  23-50. 


PHILOSOPHY 

LAW 

THEOLOGY 


Logische  Exempla  und  ihre  Funktion 

in  der  Responsio  ad  Lutherum 

des  Thomas  Morus* 

Uwe  Baumann 

Die  Utopier  verfiigten,  obwohl  die  antiken  Philosopher!  ihnen  vor 
der  Ankunft  Raphaels  unbekannt  waren,  in  der  Musik,  der  Dia- 
lektik  und  der  Mathematik  iiber  ungefahr  die  gleichen  Erkennt- 
nisse  wie  die  iibrige  Welt: 

Caeterum  ut  antiquos  omnibus  prope  rebus  exaequant,  ita  nuperorum 
inuentis  dialecticorum  longe  sunt  impares.  Nam  ne  uUam  quidem  regu- 
1am  inuenerunt  earum,  quas  de  restrictionibus,  amplificationibus,  ac 
suppositionibus  acutissime  excogitatis  in  paruis  logicalibus  passim  hie 
ediscunt  pueri. 

Aber  wenn  sie  den  Alten  fast  in  jeder  Hinsicht  gleichkommen,  so  bleiben 
sie  freilich  hinter  den  dialektischen  Erfmdungen  der  Modernen  weit 
zuriick!  Haben  sie  doch  nicht  einmal  eine  einzige  von  all  den  schonen 
Regeln  erfunden,  die  iiber  restrictio,  ampliatio  und  suppositio  in  den 
Lehrbiichern  der  Parva  Logicalia  (Kleinen  Logik)  hochst  scharfsinnig 
ausgedacht  sind,  und  die  hierzulande  iiberall  schon  die  Kinder  lernen 
miissen. 

Die  hier  angesprochene  spatscholastische  Logik  der  Parva  Logicalia  steht  eben- 
falls  in  Mores  Brief  an  Martin  Dorp  (R.  15),  mit  dem  er  im  Streit  zwischen 
Erasmus  und  Dorp  Erasmus  verteidigt,  im  Mittelpunkt  der  Argumentation. 
In  den  Jahren  1981  und  1982  konnten  Daniel  Kinney  und  ich^  —  unabhangig 
voneinander— zeigen,  in  welchem  Mafie  Morus  die  Auswiichse  der  spatscho- 
lastischen  Logik,  die  jeglicher  Vernunft  zuwiderzulaufen  scheinen,  verurteilt. 
Durch  eine  eindrucksvolle  Reihe  von  Sophismata,  die  sich  im  wesentlichen  auf 
die  Telle  "De  Ampliationibus"  und  "De  Suppositionibus"  der  Parva  Logicalia 
zuriickfiihren  lassen,^  betont  Morus  eindrucksvoll,  wie  die  unsinnigen 
Spitzfmdigkeiten  spatscholastischer  Logik  der  natiirlichen  Vernunft  und  dem 
allgemeinen  Sprachgebrauch  widersprechen.  Diese  Ablehnung  spatschola- 
stischer Logik  durch  Morus  entspricht  der  allgemeinen  Einschatzung  der  Hu- 


564  LOGISCHE  EXEMPLA  UND  IHRE  FUNKTION   BEI  THOMAS   MORUS 

manisten,  wie  schon  ein  fliichtiger  Blick  in  das  Lob  der  Torheit  des  Erasmus 
von  Rotterdam,  die  Schriften  Juan  Luis  Vives'  und  Johann  Ecks,  um  nur  ei- 
nige  zu  nennen,  verdeutlicht. 

Der  Brief  an  Dorp  ist  jedoch  noch  aus  einem  weiteren  Grunde  hier  heran- 
zuziehen:  in  ihm  formuliert  Morus  explizit,  welche  Elemente  der  Logik  oder 
Dialektik  (die  Begriffe  werden  synonym  gebraucht^)  er  als  wesendich  betrach- 
tet.  Morus  rechnet  dazu  die  Kategorienlehre,  die  Satzlehre  und  schliefilich  die 
Syllogistik  des  Aristoteles,  damit  auch  die  Analytik,  Topik  und  die  Sophistischen 
Widerlegungen.  Im  ersten  Teil  d^r  Analytik  behandelt  Aristoteles  bekanntlich  das 
Schlufiverfahren  im  allgemeinen,  im  zweiten  Teil  d^r  Analytik  den  wissenschaft- 
lichen  und  demonstrativen  oder  apodiktischen  Schlufi.  Die  Topik  hat  es  mit 
den  wahrscheinlichen  Schliissen  zu  tun,  die  insofern  wahrscheinlich  sind,  als 
ihre  Pramissen  es  sind.  In  den  Sophistischen  Widerlegungen  bilden  die  Trug-  bzw. 
die  Scheinschliisse  den  Gegenstand  der  Untersuchung.  Neben  dieser  rein  ari- 
stotelischen  Logik  bezeichnet  More  auch  die  fiinf  Kategoreme  des  Porphy- 
rius  (Gattung,  Art,  Differenz,  Proprium,  Akzidenz),  die  dieser  bekanntlich 
als  Einleitung  in  die  Kategorienlehre  des  Aristoteles  konzipiert  hatte,  als 
wichtige  Bestandteile  der  Logik. 

Auf  diese  im  eigentlichen  Sinne  klassische  Logik  —  Elemente  der  stoischen 
Logik,  insbesondere  die  stoische  Syllogistik  kommen  noch  hinzu^  —  greift 
Morus  in  seinen  iibrigen  Werken,  insbesondere  in  seinen  kontroverstheolo- 
gischen  Schriften  immer  wieder  zuriick,  ist  sie  doch  ein  geeignetes  Mittel,  die 
Argumentation  des  jeweiligen  Opponenten  auf  Konsistenz  und  Inkonsistenz 
zu  iiberpriifen.  Untersuchungen  iiber  die  Elemente  und  die  Funktion  der 
Logik  in  Mores  Kontroversschriften,  sieht  man  einmal  von  einer  mehr  all- 
gemeinen Wiirdigung  im  Rahmen  seines  anregenden  Buches  Thomas  More  and 
Tudor  Polemics  durch  Rainer  Pineas  und  einigen  Bemerkungen  in  der  Morus- 
biographie  von  Richard  Marius  ab,^  sind  bis  heute  Desiderata  der  Morus- 
Forschung.  Im  folgenden  mochte  ich  —  zumindest  fur  die  Responsio  ad 
Lutherum  — durch  eine  Detailanalyse  diese  Liicke  zu  schliefien  versuchen.  Um- 
fang  und  Komplexitat  der  Schrift,  die  Fiille  von  logisch  relevanten  Details 
zwingt  in  Anbetracht  der  zur  Verfiigung  stehenden  Vortragszeit  zu  exem- 
plarischem  Vorgehen. 

Sieht  man  einmal  ab  von  der  allgemeinen  Verwendung  logischer  Termini, 
etwa,  wenn  Morus  Luthers  Forderung,  alle  menschlichen  Gesetze  abzuschaf- 
fen,  als  eine  Art  Korollar  der  gesamten  lutherischen  Haresie  betrachtet  oder 
wenn  er  fiir  die  Lehrmeinungen  der  rechtglaubigen  Kirche  vier  Postulate  auf- 
stellt  und  eingehend  begriindet  (L  Luther  moge  der  Heiligen  Schrift  Glauben 
schenken;  2.  Luther  moge  glauben,  dafi  einige  Dinge  ausgesprochen,  verrich- 
tet  und  von  Gott  gelehrt  wurden,  die  nicht  schriftlich  iiberliefert  sind;  3.  Luther 
moge  glauben,  die  Kirche  habe  von  Gott  die  Fahigkeit  erhalten,  Worte  Gottes 
von  denen  der  Menschen  zu  scheiden;  4.  Luther  moge  bei  zweifelhaften  Deu- 
tungen  einzelner  Schriftstellen  doch  dem  einheitlichen,  konsistenten  Urteil  der 


UWE  BAUMANN  565 

Kirchenvater  und  dem  Glauben  der  gesamten  Kirche  vertrauen  und  sich  nicht 
allein  auf  sein  eigenes  Urteil  verlassen),  Luthers  Lehren  hingegen  auf  ein  ein- 
ziges  Postulat  zuriickfiihrt,  dafi  ihm,  Luther,  allein  in  alien  Dingen  Glauben 
zu  schenken  sei/^  so  verwendet  Morus  — wie  es  dem  gesamten  Charakter 
seiner  Schrift  entspricht  —  Elemente  der  Logik,  insbesondere  Elemente  der  klas- 
sischen  Syllogistik  und  der  spatscholastischen  consequentiae-Traktate,^^  um 
Luthers  Aussagen  kritisch  zu  iiberpriifen. 

Ausgangspunkt  auf  einer  weitgehend  sachlichen  Ebene  der  Auseinanderset- 
zung  mit  Luthers  Lehren  ist  es  dabei  haufig,  Luthers  Aussagen  auf  innere 
Konsistenz  hin  zu  befragen,  ist  doch  der  Nachweis  von  Inkonsistenz  —  in  Mores 
Worten  — das  starkste  Argument  sowohl  im  Beweis  wie  auch  bei  der  Wider- 
legung.^^  Im  Rahmen  solcher  Konsistenziiberpriifungen  entwickelt  Morus 
ein  Instrumentarium,  das  iiber  die  Uberpriifung  der  formalen  Giiltigkeit  von 
Aussagen,  die  Konstruktion  analoger  Satze,  die  dann  ihrerseits  die  Unsin- 
nigkeit  der  gegnerischen  Aussagen  betonen,  bis  zu  der  Entwicklung  von  sich 
gegenseitig  ausschliefienden  Schlufifolgerungen,  die  sich  logisch  zwangslaufig 
aus  Luthers  Aussagen  ergeben,  womit  diese  selbst  ad  absurdum  gefiihrt 
werden,  reicht.  Dies  soil  im  folgenden  anhand  ausgewahlter  Beispiele  ver- 
deutlicht  werden. 

Luthers  Argument  gegen  das  Szikrament  der  Ehe  (662/22-28): 

Neque  enim  scriptura  patitur,  ut  matrimonium  sacramentum  dicatur, 
quum  sacramentum  usu  totius  scripturae  significet,  rem  secretam  et  abs- 
conditam,  quam  sola  fide  consequi  possis.  Matrimonium  autem  adeo  non 
est  res  abscondita,  aut  fide  percepta,  ut  nisi  palam  ob  oculos  fiat, 
matrimonium  esse  non  possit,  cum  sit  copula  maris  et  foeminae  externa, 
et  publica  professione  et  conuersatione  confirmata. 

Denn  die  Schrift  gestattet  nicht,  die  Ehe  ads  Sakrament  zu  bezeich- 
nen,  da  nach  dem  allgemeinem  Gebrauch  (des  Terminus)  ein  Sakra- 
ment etwas  bezeichnet,  das  verborgen  und  versteckt  ist  und  durch  den 
Glauben  2illein  erlangt  werden  kann.  Aber  die  Ehe  ist  so  weit  davon  ent- 
fernt,  eine  verborgene  Angelegenheit  zu  sein  oder  nur  durch  Glauben 
aillein  erlangt  werden  zu  konnen,  dafi— wenn  sie  nicht  offentlich  vor  unser 
aller  Augen  geschlossen  wurde  — es  gar  keine  Ehe  sein  kann,  ist  sie  doch 
das  aufierliche  Band  von  Mann  und  Frau,  gefestigt  durch  offentliches 
Versprechen  und  Bund 

wird  von  Morus  allein  formal  schon  dadurch  widerlegt,  dafi  er  ironisch  fragt 
(664/5-  9): 

Domine  doctor,  per  uestram  fidem,  imo  per  infidelitatem  uestram,  per 
quam  regulam  tenet  ista  consequential  quum  in  praemissis  mutatur  co- 
pula a  significare  ad  esse,  nisi  uocabularij  uestri  uobis  dicunt,  quod  haec 
duo  uerba.  Sum  et  Significo,  idem  significant. 


^66  LOGISCHE  EXEMPLA  UND  IHRE  FUNKTION   BEI  THOMAS   MORUS 

Verehrter  Doktor,  bei  Deinem  Glauben  oder  besser  bei  Deinem  Un- 
glauben,  nach  welcher  Regel  gewinnt  diese  Konklusion  Giiltigkeit,  da 
doch  in  den  Pramissen  die  Kopula  von  "bezeichnen"  zu  "sein"  veran- 
dert  wurde,  es  sei  denn,  Deine  Worterbiicher  sagen  Dir,  dafi  "Ich  bin" 
und  "Ich  bedeute"  das  gleiche  bedeuten. 

Ein  weiteres  Beispiel  mag  genii  gen;  im  Zusammenhang  mit  der  Widerlegung 
der  Aussage  Luthers,  dafi  allein  im  Geiste  Christi  der  Mensch  gut  sein  konne, 
und  es  dementsprechend  keinen  Unterschied  ausmache,  ein  guter  Mensch  oder 
ein  guter  Princeps  zu  sein,  kniipft  Morus  zunachst  an  ein  Beispiel  aus  Lu- 
thers Argumentation  an.  Der  Satz  "At  Saul,  ut  desijt  esse  bonus  uir,  simul 
desijt  esse  bonus  princeps"  ("Als  aber  Saulus  aufhorte,  ein  guter  Mann  zu  sein, 
horte  er  zugleich  auf,  ein  guter  Princeps  zu  sein")  konne  nicht  als  Beweis  fur 
Luthers  Darlegungen  gewertet  werden,  da  diese  partikulare  Aussage  nicht  mit 
Notwendigkeit  zu  einer  allgemeingiiltigen  Aussage  gemacht  werden  konne; 
Luthers  Schlufi  (bei  Luther  war  es  kein  Schlufi,  sondern  lediglich  ein  Beispiel) 
zieht  Morus  mit  einem  analog  konstruierten  voUends  ins  Lacherliche  (336/21): 
"iste  homo  stultus  est:  ergo  omnis  homo  stultus  est"("Dieser  Mensch  ist  dumm, 
also  ist  jeder  Mensch  dumm"). 

Als  weiteres  Beispiel  fiir  die  Widerlegung  durch  analoge  Formulierungen, 
deren  Unsinnigkeit  jedermann  aufgrund  der  natiirlichen  Vernunft  unmittel- 
bar  einsichtig  ist,  sei  Mores  Erwiderung  auf  den  Anspruch  Luthers,  auch  den 
Papst  be-  und  verurteilen  zu  konnen,  herangezogen  (246/12-17): 

Papa  noster  est,  inquit:  ergo  nostrum  non  est  ab  ipso  iudicari,  sed  ipsum 
iudicare.  Eadem  ratione,  medicus  noster  est:  ergo  non  est  nostrum  ab 
ipso  curari:  sed  ipsum  curare.  Et  doctor  discentium  est:  ergo  non  est  ip- 
sorum  ab  illo  discere,  sed  docere  eum. 

Der  Papst  ist  unser,  sagt  er,  also  ist  es  unser  Recht,  nicht  von  ihm  ge- 
richtet  zu  werden,  sondern  iiber  ihn  zu  richten.  Nach  der  gleichen  Logik: 
ein  Arzt  ist  unser,  also  ist  es  unser  Recht,  nicht  von  ihm  geheilt  zu  werden, 
sondern  ihn  zu  heilen.  Und  ein  Lehrer  gehort  seinen  Schiilern,  also  ist 
es  ihr  Recht,  nicht  von  ihm  zu  lernen,  sondern  ihn  zu  lehren. 

Etwas  ausfiihrlicher  mochte  ich  im  folgenden  Mores  Widerlegung  der  Grund- 
position  Luthers,  zur  Erkenntnis  der  wahren  Kirche  seien  drei  Kriterien  hin- 
reichend  (Taufe,  Brot,  wahre  Predigt  des  Evangeliums),  referieren,  da  sie  — in 
sich  konsistent  — veranschaulicht,  wie  Morus  die  Konsequenzen  der  "Irr"-Lehre 
Luthers  aufzeigt,  gleichzeitig  selbst  damit  aber  dokumentiert,  dafi  mit  logi- 
schen  Schliissen  keine  Beweise  in  Fragen  des  Glaubens  gefiihrt  werden 
konnen.  ^^ 

Gesetzt  den  Fall,  Luther  ware  A,  seine  Zuhorer  B,  C,  und  D,  und  es  gabe 
eine  Person  E,  die  Gewifiheit  iiber  eine  wahre  Kirche  haben  wollte,  die  ihrer 
festen  Uberzeugung  nach  diejenige  ist,  die  ohne  Siinde  und  mit  Sicherheit 


UWE  BAUMANN  567 

an  den  drei  Zeichen  Taufe,  Brot,  und  der  wahren  Verkiindigung  des  Evan- 
geliums  zu  erkennen  ist.  E  kame  in  die  Kirche  von  A,  B,  C  und  D,  von  denen 
er  weifi,  dafi  sie  getauft  sind,  und  die  er  an  der  Eucharistiefeier  habe  teilneh- 
men  sehen,  und  E  hore  dort  A  wahr  (an  sich  schon  eine  Unmoglichkeit,  wie 
Morus  betont)  predigen,  dann  sei  dies  alles  dennoch  zur  Erkenntnis  der  wah- 
ren Kirche  nicht  hinreichend.  Denn  es  gabe  zwei  MogUchkeiten:  entweder 
kenne  E  selbst  die  HeiHge  Schrift  und  die  Lehren  des  chrisdichen  Glaubens 
oder  er  habe  nur  von  Christus  gehort  und  suche  nun  die  Kirche,  in  der  er 
ernsthaft  ihren  Glauben  kennenlernen  konne.  Kennte  er  die  HeiUge  Schrift 
selbst,  so  wiifite  E  mit  Sicherheit,  dafi  die  Kirche  von  A,  B,  C  und  D  anhand 
dieser  drei  Zeichen  nicht  als  die  wahre  erkannt  werden  konne,  da  er  nicht  wis- 
sen  konne,  ob  A,  B,  C  und  D  gute  oder  siindige  Menschen  seien.  Diese  Kon- 
sequenz  habe,  und  dies  wird  Morus  nicht  miide  zu  betonen,  Giiltigkeit  selbst 
unter  der  Annahme,  dafi  A  das  wahre  Evangelium  predige. 

Kennte  E  die  Heilige  Schrift  jedoch  nicht  und  wiinschte,  mit  dem  christ- 
lichen  Glauben  bekannt  und  vertraut  gemacht  zu  werden,  kame  er  in  die  Kirche 
von  A,  B,  C  und  D  und  horte  A  in  gewohnter  Weise  predigen  und  sahe  B, 
C,  und  D  zustimmen  und  erklaren,  die  Predigt  verkiinde  den  wahren  Glauben, 
so  konne  E  dies  auf  keinen  Fall  als  bewiesen  ansehen.  Denn  selbst  unter  der 
Annahme,  A  predige  das  wahre  Evangelium,  miisse  E  bedenken,  dafi  A,  B, 
C  und  D  nur  ein  kleiner  Teil  derjenigen  sei,  die  sich  zum  christlichen  Glauben 
bekennten.  Des  weiteren  habe  E  selbst  keine  Moglichkeit,  zu  entscheiden,  ob 
A  das  wahre  Evangelium  predige.  E  wiirde,  nachdem  er  durch  alle  christlichen 
Nationen  gereist  und  in  den  dortigen  Kirchen  immer  den  gleichen  Glauben 
habe  predigen  horen,  zweifelsfrei  wissen,  dafi  — wenn  es  eine  wahre  Kirche 
Christi  auf  Erden  gabe  — es  nur  diejenige  sein  konne,  die  von  Christus  begriin- 
det,  durch  die  Apostel  verbreitet,  von  den  Kirchenvatern  weiter  ausgebaut 
und  die  durch  Gottes  besondere  Gnade  iiber  eine  so  lange  Zeit  an  der  Einheit 
des  christlichen  Glaubens  festgehalten  habe.  Kame  E,  dies  ist  natiirlich  das 
Argument  der  Menge  und  der  Tradition,*'^  danach  erneut  in  die  Kirche  von 
A,  B,  C,  und  D,  so  wiirde  er  dort  ungewohnliche  und  verriickte  Lehrmei- 
nungen  iiber  wichtige  Glaubensfragen  als  solche  erkennen  konnen,  Lehren, 
die  nicht  nur  im  Widerspruch  zur  ecclesia  catholica  stiinden,  sondern  auch  noch 
die  offentliche  Moral  untergriiben  (190/26-30): 

Fieri,  inquam,  non  potest:  quin  .E.  certo  sit  intellecturus  ecclesiam  .A. 
B.  C.  D.  non  esse  ecclesiam  Christi,  nee  bonorum  coetum:  sed  pessi- 
morum  scurrarum  gurgustium,  et  conciliabulum  Sathanae:  et  iam  ex  his 
interpretaretur  .A.  uel  alpha  esse  haereticorum,  uel  Antichristum. 
Es  kann  dann  nur,  so  sage  ich,  geschehen,  dafi  E  mit  Gewifiheit  erken- 
nen wird,  dafi  die  Kirche  von  A,  B,  C  und  D  weder  die  Kirche  Christi 
ist,  noch  eine  Versammlung  der  Guten,  sondern  daft  sie  die  Schanke 
der  schlimmsten  Possenreifter,  die  Lasterstatte  Satans  ist.  Daraus  wird 


568  LOGISCHE  EXEMPLA  UND  IHRE  FUNKTION   BEI  THOMAS  MORUS 

er  dann  A  als  das  Alpha  der  Haretiker  oder  als  den  Antichristen  erken- 
nen. 

Gewinnt  bereits  hier  die  Verwendung  logischer  Elemente  polemische  Bedeu- 
tung,  so  wird  dies  noch  offenkundiger  in  Passagen,  in  denen  Morus  sozusagen 
mogliche  Argumentationen  Luthers  "nachzeichnet"^^  oder  ihm  erfundene  di- 
rekt  in  den  Mund  legt.  Dies  sei  ebenfalls  an  einem  anschaulichen  Beispiel  vor- 
gefiihrt.  Im  zehnten  Kapitel  des  1.  Buches  referiert  Morus  einige  Details  aus 
Luthers  Kontroverse  mit  Ambrosius  Catharinus;^^  im  Zusammenhang  mit 
der  "biblischen"  Begriindung  des  papstlichen  Primats  "zitiert"  Morus  Martin 
Luther  (132/12-  16): 

Tu  Catharine  non  negas  meam  disputationem  esse  in  aliquo  sensu  ueram: 
ergo  tua  est  falsa.  Nam  si  aliquid  est  uerum  quod  ego  dico:  totum  est 
falsum  quod  dicis  tu.  Nam  aut  mea  funditus  et  in  totum  nega  aut  tua 
funditus  inania  esse  concedas. 

Catharinus,  du  leugnest  nicht,  dafi  mein  Argument  in  gewisser  Weise 
wahr  ist;  ergo  mufi  deins  falsch  sein.  Denn  wenn  irgendetwas,  das  ich 
sage,  wahr  ist,  mufi  alles,  was  du  anfiihrst,  falsch  sein.  Denn  du  mufit 
entweder  meine  Argumente  zur  Ganze  und  vollstandig  widerlegen  oder 
eingestehen,  dafi  deine  eigenen  ganzlich  wertlos  sind. 

Zunachst  ist  festzuhalten,  dafi  Luther  einen  solchen  Unsinn  nie  geaufiert  hat, 
wie  im  iibrigen  schon  John  M.  Headley  erkannte.^''  Dariiber  hinaus  ent- 
spricht  die  logische  Struktur  der  Luther  untergeschobenen  Aussagen  insgesamt 
einem  Fehlschlufi  aufgrund  des  Akzidens  ("fallacia  accidentis"),  wie  sie  von  Aris- 
toteles  im  fiinften  Kapitel  seiner  Sophistischen  Widerlegungen  vorgestellt 
werden:^^ 

Darauf  dafi  etwas  entweder  schlechthin  oder  nur  beziehungsweise  und 
nicht  eigentlich  gemeint  ist  ("fallacia  secundum  quid  et  simpliciter"),  fufien 
die  Fehlschliisse,  wenn  das  vom  Teil  gemeinte  als  schlechthin  gemeint 
gefafit  wird,  wie  wenn  man  schliefit,  dafi  das  Nichtseiende  ist,  wenn  es 
Gegenstand  der  Meinung  ist. 

Betrachten  wir  etwas  genauer  die  syllogistische  Struktur  der  vorgeblichen  Lu- 
theraufierung,  die  sich  reduziert  auf  den  logischen  Gehalt  folgendermafien  dar- 
stellen  liefie  und  damit  in  etwa  dem  dritten  (nicht  sowohl  p  als  auch  q;  nun 
aber  p;  also  nicht  q)  und/oder  vierten  (p  oder  q;  nun  aber  p;  adso  nicht  q)  Axiom 
des  Chrysipp  entsprache:'^ 

PI:  Wenn  meine  Argumente  richtig  sind,  sind  deine  falsch. 
P2:  Meine  Argumente  sind  richtig. 
K:  Also  sind  deine  Argumente  falsch. 

Dieser  korrekte  Syllogismus  fiihrt  zu  einer  wahren  Aussage,  sofern  die  Pramis- 


UWE  BAUMANN  569 

sen  wahr  sind.  Dies  ist  fiir  P2  jedoch  aus  dem  Zugestandnis  des  Catharinus, 
dafi  Luthers  Argumente  in  gewisser  Weise  richtig  seien,  nicht  zu  beweisen. 
Der  Scheinschluficharakter  liegt  offen  zu  Tage,  im  zweiten  Teil  des 
herangezogenen  "Zitats"  formuliert  Morus  aus  diesem  Scheinschlufi  eine  all- 
gemeingiiltige  Regel,  die  Luther  dem  Spott  und  dem  Gelachter  des  aufmerk- 
samen  Lesers  preisgeben  soil.  Damit  nicht  genug,  zeigt  Morus  am  Beispiel 
von  Vergils  Sinon,  der  in  Details  die  Wahrheit  sagte,  aber  insgesamt  mit  seinen 
iibrigen  Liigen  den  Untergang  Trojas  herbeifiihrte,  nochmals  explizit  auf, 
wie  es  jeglicher  Vernunft  zuwiderlaufe,  aus  einigen  wahren  Satzen  zu  schliefien, 
alle  Satze  seien  wahr.  Gleichzeitig  verdeutlicht  dieser  Vergleich  mit  Sinon, 
fiir  wie  gefahrlich  Morus  die  Lehren  Luthers  halt,  die  den  Untergang  des 
christlichen  Abendlandes  bedeuten  konnten.^^ 

Insgesamt,  so  darf  man  wohl  zusammenfassen,  hat  dieses  von  Morus  Luther 
untergeschobene  Zitat  die  Funktion,  Luther  eine  schier  unglaubliche  Arro- 
ganz  zu  unterstellen  und  ihn  gleichzeitig— ob  seiner  Dummheit  — zum  Gespott 
der  Leser  zu  machen.  Dieser  untergeschobene  Scheinschlufi  —  im  iibrigen  eine 
der  wenigen  Passagen,  in  denen  Morus  Luther  falsch  oder  entstellt  zitiert  — 
hat  also  vorwiegend  polemischen  Charakter. 

Ausschliefilich  polemischen  Charakter  besitzen  Formulierungen  Mores,  in 
denen  er  —  ankniipfend  an  Heinrichs  Assertio  Septem  Sacramentorum^^  oder  an 
Luthers  Lehren^^  —  Syllogismen  und  Enthymeme  gegen  die  Person  und  den 
Charakter  Luthers  konstruiert.  Ein  Beispiel,  diese  Reihe  liefie  sich  ad  ultimos 
verlangern,  mag  hier  genii  gen:  Luthers  Aufierung,  dafi  auch  heilige  Manner 
sich  irren  konnten  und  geirrt  haben,  wird  von  Morus  zunachst  als  Anspruch 
Luthers  umgedeutet,  der  einzige  unfehlbare  Interpret  der  Heiligen  Schrift  zu 
sein^^  und  sodann  mit  einem  schonen  Vergleich  logisch  stringent  ad  absur- 
dum  gefuhrt  (252/26-  29): 

tanquam  caecus  aliquis  diceret:  Nemo  est  fere  uidentium:  qui  non  erret 
aliquando  in  re  rum  coloribus:  ego  errare  non  possum.  Si  quis  ergo  nolit 
falli,  de  coloribus:  diffidat  caeteris  mortalibus  uniuersis:  atque  uni  cre- 
dat  mihi. 

Als  ob  irgendein  Blinder  sagen  wiirde:  Kaum  jemanden  der  Sehenden 
gibt  es,  der  sich  nicht  manchmal  bei  den  Farben  von  Dingen  irrte;  ich 
aber  kann  mich  nicht  irren;  ergo,  wenn  irgendeiner  also  nicht  iiber  die 
Farben  getauscht  werden  mochte,  so  mag  er  alien  iibrigen  Sterblichen 
mifitrauen  und  nur  mir  allein  glauben. 

Ist  hier  zumindest  noch  die  syllogistische  Struktur  der  Argumentation  erkenn- 
bar  und  polemisch  funktionalisiert,  so  erscheinen  im  folgenden  Zitat,  und  damit 
komme  ich  zum  Schlufi  meines  Vortrages,  logische  Fachtermini  im  Kontext 
blofter  Verbal injurien  und  werden  — da  gedanklich  ihrer  eigentlichen  Sprach- 
ebene  enthoben  — selbst  zu  Schimpfworten:  Ankniipfend  an  Luthers  Aussa- 
gen,  insbesondere  seine  syllogistischen,  bewertet  Morus  auch  die  Grobheit  in 


570  LOGISCHE  EXEMPLA  UND  IHRE  FUNKTION   BEI  THOMAS   MORUS 

Luthers  Sprache  und  fafit  seine  Verurteilung  abschliefiend  pragnant  zusam- 
men  (180/7-15): 

Atque  haec  est  domini  doctoris  posterioristice  qui,  quum  sibi  iam  prius 
fas  esse  scripserit,  coronam  regiam  conspergere  et  conspurcare  sterco- 
ribus:  an  non  nobis  fas  erit  posterius,  huius  posterioristicae  linguam  ster- 
coratam,  pronunciare  dignissimam:  ut  uel  meientis  mulae  posteriora 
lingat  suis  prioribus:  donee  rectius  ex  prioribus,  didicerit  posteriores  con- 
cludere,  propositionibus. 

Und  dies  ist  die  Pramisse  a  posteriori  des  geehrten  Doktors.  Da  er  ge- 
schrieben  hat,  dafi  er  a  priori  ein  Recht  habe,  die  konigliche  Krone  mit 
Scheifie  zu  bespritzen  und  zu  beschmieren,  haben  wir  da  nicht  im  nach- 
hinein  das  Recht  zu  erklaren,  die  vollgeschissene  Zunge  dieses  Logikers 
a  posteriori  sei  hochst  geeignet  mit  ihrem  Vordersten  das  wahre  Hin- 
terste  eines  pissenden  Maultiers  zu  kiissen,  bis  er  es  besser  gelernt  haben 
wird,  korrekte  Konklusionen  aus  vorgegebenen  Pramissen  abzuleiten. 


Anmerkungen 


*Die  Responsio  adLutherum  des  Thomas  Morus  wird  nach  der  Ausgabe  von  John  M. 
Headley  (CW  5,  [New  Haven;  London,  1969])  mit  Seiten-  und  Zeilenangaben  im  Text 
zitiert.  Die  deutschen  Ubersetzungen  stammen  jeweils  vom  Verfasser. 

1.  E.  Surtz;  J.  H.  Hexter(Hrsg.),  St.  Thomas  More,  Utopia,  CW  4,  New  Haven;  Lon- 
don, 1965,  158/20-25;  vgl.  hierzu  E.  Surtz,  "Logic  in  Utopia,"  P(129,  1950,  389-400; 
ders.,  The  Praise  of  Pleasure,  Philosophy,  Education,  and  Communism  in  More's  Utopis,  Cam- 
bridge/Mass., 1957,  bes.  87-101. 

2.  D.  Kinney,  "More's  Letter  to  Dorp:  Remapping  the  Trivium,"  i?Q,  34  1981, 
179-210;  vgl.  neuerhch  ders.,  Thomas  More's  Humanistic  Defenses:  A  New  Critical  Edition 
and  Translation  of  Five  Letter-Essays,  3  Bde.,  Diss.  Yale  University,  1983;  U.  Baumann, 
"Dorp,  Erasmus,  More:  Humanistische  Aspekte  einer  literarischen  Kontroverse"  in: 
Thomas-Morus-GeselbchaftJahrbuchl982,  Diisseldorf,  1983,  141-59;  vgl.  auchders..  Die 
Antike  in  den  Epigrammen  und  Brief  en  Sir  Thomas  Mores,  Beitrage  zur  englischen  und  ameri- 
kanischen  Literatur  Bd.  1,  Paderborn;  Miichen;  Wien;  Zurich,  1984,  bes.  110-18. 

3.  Vgl.  die  vorziigliche  Edition  von  L.  M.  de  Rijk  (Hrsg.),  Peter  of  Spain,  Tractatus 
called  afterwards  Summule  Logicales,  Assen,  1972;  vgl.  insgesamtP.  Boehner,  Medieval  Logic, 
An  Outline  of  its  Development  from  1250  to  c.  1400,  Manchester,  1952,  19  ff.  und  speziell 
zu  Petrus  Hispanus  77  ff.;  W.  und  M.  Kneale,  The  Development  of  Logic,  Oxford,  1962, 
bes.  224-74;  die  Belege  fur  Mores  direkten  Riickgriffauf  Petrus  Hispanus  bei  U.  Bau- 
mann, Die  Antike,  114-16. 

4.  Vgl.  zu  Erasmus  C.  Dolfen,  Die  Stellung  des  Erasmus  von  Rotterdam  zur  scholastischen 
Methode,  Diss.  Miinster,  1936;  vgl.  zu  Vives  R.  Guerlac  (Hrsg.), yuan  Luis  Vives,  Against 
the  Pseudodialecticians,  A  Humanist  Attack  on  Medieval  Logic,  Dordrecht;  Boston;  London, 
1979;  die  Quellen  zu  Eck  sind  zusammengestellt  und  ausgewertet  bei  A.  Seifert,  Logik 


UWE  BAUMANN  57I 

zwischen  Scholastik  und  Humanismus,  Das  Kommentarwerkjohann  Ecks,  Humanistische  Bib- 
liothek,  Reihe  I,  Bd.  31,  Miinchen,  1978;  vgl.  auch  allgemein  E.  Kessler,  "Humanist 
Thought:  A  Response  to  Scholastic  Philosophy"  in:  Res  Publica  Litterarum  2,  1979,  149-66. 

5.  Vgl.  L.  Oeing-Hanhoff,  in:  J.  Ritter  (Hrsg.),  Historisches  Worterbuch  der Philosophie, 
Bd.  2,  Basel;  Stuttgart,  1972,  Sp.  175-80,  s.v.  "Dialektik." 

6.  E.  F.  Rogers  (Hrsg.),  The  Correspondence  of  Sir  Thomas  More,  Princeton,  1947,  Nr. 
15,  Z.  328  ff;  vgl.  allgemein  zu  Mores  Brief  an  Dorp  U.  Baumann,  Die  Antike,  110  ff. 

7.  Vgl.  dazu  bes.  U.  Baumann,  Die  Antike,  132  f.  Es  mufi  jedoch  ebenfalls  erwahnt 
werden,  dafi  Morus  sich  bisweilen  auch  selbst  in  die  Tradition  spatscholastischer  Logik 
einordnet.  Seine  Ausfiihrungen  im  Zusammenhang  mit  dem  "Beweis"  in  den  Four  Last 
Things  fiir  den  Satz,  der  Mensch  lebe  von  Geburt  an  auf  den  Tod  hin,  gemahnen  in 
Aufbau  und  Durchfiihrung  an  die  "incipit"  und  "desinit"  Sophismata  (vgl.  hierzu  N. 
Kretzmann,  "Incipit/Desinit,"  P.  K.  Machamer;  R.  G.  Turnbull  (Hrsg.)  Motion  and 
Time,  Space  and  Matter,  Ohio  State,  1976,  101-36)  der  Logik  des  zwolften  und  drei- 
zehnten  Jahrhunderts.  Vgl.  W.  E.  Campbell;  A.  W.  Reed  (Hrsg.),  The  English  Works 
of  Sir  Thomas  More,  Bd.  1  (London;  New  York,  1931),  474: 

Some  man  saith  merrily  to  his  fellow,  "Be  merry  man,  —thou  shalt  never  die  as 
long  as  thou  livest."  And  albeit  he  seem  to  say  true,  yet  saith  he  more  that  he 
can  make  good.  For  if  that  were  true,  I  could  make  him  much  merrier,  for  then 
he  should  never  die.  Ye  will  peradventure  marvel  of  this,  but  it  is  easy  to  prove. 
For  I  think  ye  will  grant  me  that  there  is  no  time  after  that  a  man  hath  once 
life,  but  he  is  either  alive  or  dead.  Then  will  there  no  man  say  that  one  can  die 
either  before  he  get  life  or  after  that  he  hath  lost  it,  and  so  hath  he  no  time  left 
to  die  in  but  while  he  hath  life.  Wherefore,  if  we  neither  die  before  our  life  nor 
when  we  be  dead  already,  needs  must  it  follow  that  we  never  die  but  while  we  live. 

Vgl.  auch  den  Vergleich,  der  die  Parallelitat  zu  den  "incipit"-  und  "desinit''-Sophismata 
explizit  verdeutlicht  (475): 

Now  tell  me,  then,  if  thou  were  going  out  of  an  house,  whether  art  thou  going 
out  only  when  thy  foot  is  on  the  uttermost  inch  of  the  threshold,  thy  body  half 
out  of  the  door,  or  else  when  thou  beginnest  to  set  the  first  foot  forward  to  go 
out,  in  what  place  of  the  house  soever  ye  stand  when  ye  buskle  forward?  I  would 
say  that  ye  be  going  out  of  the  house  from  the  first  foot  ye  set  forward  to  go  forth. 
No  man  will  think  other,  as  I  suppose,  but  all  is  one  reason  in  going  hence  and 
coming  hither.  Now  if  one  were  coming  hither  to  this  town,  he  were  not  only 
coming  hither  while  he  were  entering  in  at  the  gate,  but  all  the  way  also  from 
whence  he  came  hitherward.  Nor,  in  likewise,  in  going  hence  from  this  town,  —  a 
man  is  not  only  going  from  this  town  while  he  hath  his  body  in  the  gate  going 
outward,  but  also  while  he  setteth  his  foot  out  of  his  host's  house  to  go  forward. 
And  therefore,  if  a  man  met  him  by  the  way,  far  yet  within  the  town,  and  asked 
him  whither  he  were  going,  he  should  truly  answer  that  he  were  going  out  of 
the  town,  all  were  the  town  so  long  that  he  had  ten  miles  to  go  ere  he  came  at 
the  gate. 

8.  R.  Pineas,  Thomas  More  and  Tudor  Polemics,  Bloomington;  London,  1968,  passim; 
zur  Responsio  ad  Lutherum  speziell  14-28;  R.  Marius,  Thomas  More,  A  Biography,  Lon- 
don; Melbourne,  1985,  bes.  276-91. 

9.  CW  5,  270/8-11. 

10.  CW  5,  298/26  ff. 


572 


LOGISCHE  EXEMPLA  UND  IHRE  FUNKTION   BEI  THOMAS   MORUS 


11.  Vgl.  dazu  allgemein  P.  Boehner,  Medieval  Logic,  bes.  52-75;  W.  und  M.  Kneale, 
The  Development  of  Logic,  bes.  274-97  (s.  A.  3). 

12.  CW  5,  122/28-29:  "quum  deductio  ad  inconueniens  fortissimum  sit,  et  proband! 
genus,  et  confutandi." 

13.  CW  5,  186/13  ff. 

14.  Vgl.  insgesamt  R.  Pineas,  Thomas  More  and  Tudor  Polemics,   14-28  (s.  A.  8). 

15.  Vgl.  z.  B.  CW  5,  222/24  ff.  und  304/21  ff. 

16.  Vgl.  zu  Ambrosius  Catharinus  die  kurze  Vita  bei  J.  M.  Headley,  CW  5,  875. 

17.  Vgl.  J.  M.  Headley,  CW  5,  891  (zu  132/12-16). 

18.  Aristoteles,  Sophistische  Widerlegungen  (Organon  VI),  iibersetzt  und  mit  Anmer- 
kungen  versehen  von  E.  Rolfes,  2.  Aufl.,  Hamburg,  1922/ND  1968,  Kap.  5,  166b-167a 
(p.  8). 

19.  Vgl.  Sextus  Empiricus,  Pyrrh.  Hyp.  II,  157.  Vgl.  insgesamt  W.  und  M.  Kneale 
(s.  A.  3),  The  Development  of  Logic,  bes.  158-76;  M.  Frede,  Die  Stoische  Logik,  Abhandl. 
der  Akad.  d.  Wissenschaften  in  Gottingen,  Phil. -Hist.  Kl.  3.  Folge,  Nr.  88,  Gottin- 
gen,  1974,  bes.  124-201.  Vgl.  zum  Nachleben  der  stoischen  Syllogistik  in  Spatantike 
und  friihem  Mittelalter  M.  L.  Colish,  "The  Stoic  Hypothetical  Syllogisms  and  their 
Transmission  in  the  Latin  West  through  the  Early  Middle  Ages"  in:  Res  Publica  Lit- 
terarum  2  (1979),  19-26;  vgl.  insgesamt  auch  U.  Baumann,  Die  Antike,   132  f. 

20.  Vgl.  CW  5  132/17  ff. 

21.  Vgl.  z.  B.  CW  5,  118/24  ff.;  366/32  ff.;  410/20  ff.;  512/15  ff.;  526/19  ff.;  578/27 
ff.;  606/7  ff.;  652/5  ff.;  674/22  ff. 

22.  Vgl.  z.  B.  CW  5,  154/17  ff.;  252/2  ff.;  314/31  ff.;  482/1  ff.  Der  Verfasser  wird 
in  Kiirze  eine  ausfiihrliche  Untersuchung  iiber  das  affektivische  Vokabular  des  Tho- 
mas Morus  in  der  Responsio  ad  Lutherum  vorlegen. 

23.  Vgl.  dazu  nochmals  die  einzige  Pramisse,  die  Morus  Luther  als  Grundlage  seiner 
"Irr"-Lehre  in  den  Mund  legt  (304/7-10):  "LVTHERVS  contra,  paulo  modestior  est: 
principium  enim  statuit  etiam  ille,  sed  dumtaxat  unum:  quod  sibi  concedi  postulat. 
Est  autem  illud  huiusmodi.  Omnibus  de  rebus  soli  credendum  ipsi." 


Science  and  Scholasticism  in  Melchior  Cornaeus  SJ 

Paul  Richard  Blum 
(Translated  by  L.  A.  Grega) 

The  philosophy  textbook  written  by  Melchior  Cornaeus^  and  pub- 
lished 1657  by  Zinck  in  Wiirzburg  carries  the  title  Curriculum  phil- 
osophiae  Peripateticae,  uti  hoc  tempore  in  scholis  decurri  solet,  multis  figuris 
et  curiositatibus  e  mathesi  petitis,  et  ad  physin  reductis,  illustratum}  Like  all  Baroque 
book  titles,  this  one  is  cilso  no  hybrid  of  rhetorical  amplification  but  rather  gives 
precise  information  on  the  contents  of  the  book.  It  is  a  Curriculum,  that  is,  an 
abridged  and  simplified  Cursus  Philosophicus ,  in  which  the  entire  material  of  the 
philosophy  course  is  to  be  dealt  with  brevi  compendio  in  a  manner  comprehens- 
ible to  every  student.^ 

The  metaphor  of  running  (Curriculum)  is  illustrated  on  the  title  copperplate: 
we  see  a  race  track  and  a  goddess  of  victory  under  the  motto  ""Sic  currite  ut  com- 
prehendatis"  (1  Cor.  9,  24)  as  well  as  two  sages,  one  with  a  book,  the  other  with 
an  astrolabe.  This  second  sage  also  signifies  the  subject  matter  that  is  not  con- 
tained in  the  usual  study  course  but  that  Cornaeus  promises  to  offer  in  this 
book,  namely  doctrines  from  experimental  physics  and  applied  mathematics. 
The  expression  curiosa  designates  just  that  area  of  the  natural  sciences  that  usu- 
ally did  not  appear  in  the  philosophy  course.*  The  current  level  of  experi- 
mental research  in  the  natural  sciences  is  thus  to  be  attached  onto  the  Cursus 
Philosophicus.  However,  since  modern  natural  sciences  have  developed  inde- 
pendently of  and  even  in  opposition  to  the  scholastic  instruction  of  philoso- 
phy, we  can  well  expect  a  complex  form  of  argumentation  from  the  author. 
In  the  dedication  to  the  Mainz  elector  and  bishop  of  Wiirzburg,  Johann  Phi- 
lipp  von  Schonborn  (d.  1673), Cornaeus  maintains  that  in  our  time  the  high- 
est decoration  of  philosophy  is  not  only  accessible  to  the  rulers  but  to  the 
subordinates  as  well.  The  Cursus  Philosophiae  no  longer  serves  only  the  rulers; 
rather,  it  is  also  in  the  service  of  the  general  dissemination  of  philosophic 
knowledge  —  but  only  if  theoretical  philosophy  and  the  like  applied  natural 
sciences  are  connected  in  it. 

In  basic  outline,  this  textbook  is  composed  entirely  of  those  elements  that 


574  SCIENCE  AND   SCHOLASTICISM   IN   MELCHIOR  CORNAEUS  SJ 

are  indispensible  to  any  Jesuit  philosophy  course:  1 .  Summula  dialecticae  and  logic, 
2.  physics,  3,  decoelo,  4.  meteorology  Sind  de generatione  et  corruptione,  5.  deanima, 
and  6.  metaphysics.  It  would,  of  course,  be  very  instructive  to  present  and 
explain  the  doctrines  of  the  course  in  detail  and  in  the  sequence  in  which  they 
are  to  be  treated.  Such  a  presentation,  however,  would  overtax  the  public's 
patience  since  it  could  take  about  three  years  to  do  so—  that  is,  namely,  the 
length  of  the  philosophy  course.  Instead,  I  would  like  to  comment  on  several 
points  that  are  systematically  connected  and  are  beyond  the  scope  of  this  chapter 
and  that  give  the  course  its  own  particular  character:  the  scientific  and  theore- 
tical viewpoints  on  the  one  hand  and  the  "curiosities"  on  the  other. 

The  logic  section  — Cornaeus  also  calls  it  scientia  rationalis— begins  with  our 
author's  defining  it  as  purely  practical  science  (1:57)  in  which  judgement  con- 
cerning the  correctness  of  a  syllogism  can  occur  only  per  accidens.  The  main 
task  of  logic  is  that  it  regulas  infallibiles  praescribit,  juxta  quas  discursus  et  Syllogismus 
infallibiliter  ex  arte  fiat  (ibid.).  The  question  of  the  object  of  logic  is  first  explic- 
itly raised  in  the  next  quaestio,  and  this  itself  signifies  the  weakening  of  the 
role  of  the  object  question  in  the  determination  of  the  science.  For  in  Scho- 
lasticism, the  object  always  determines  the  method  of  a  science  and  its  distinc- 
tion from  other  sciences.  Cornaeus  determines  the  operationes  intellectus  as  the 
object  of  logic  (1 :59)  by  devaluating  the  ens  rationis  to  a  mere  chimer  (following 
Suarez  and  Hurtado^).  He  can  only  conceive  it  to  be  an  objectively  false  pro- 
position, and  therefore  it  is  not  suited  to  be  the  object  of  logic  (1 :61).  The  tra- 
ditionally so-called  second  intentions  can  not  be  the  object  of  logic  because  they 
are  treated  in  logic  only  for  the  purposes  of  the  syllogism  (1:66).  The  syllo- 
gistic is  a  part  of  the  actual  object  of  logic:  the  material  object  of  logic  is  dis- 
course or  argumentation,  the  formal  object  is  the  latter's  technical  correctness. 
In  other  words,  logic  is  no  longer  determined  according  to  its  external  object. 

The  use  of  the  doctrine  of  universal  concepts  also  implies  a  distancing  from 
Thomism.  A  universal  concept  can  only  be  formed  by  the  intellect's  activity, 
in  particular  by  means  of  abstraction  (per  actum  abstractivum  praecisivum,  1:  81 
f.).  By  referring  explicitly  to  Aristotle,  Cornaeus  casts  his  vote  against  Tho- 
mists  and  for  the  univocal  concept  of  being,  thus  following  the  Scotists  and 
the  Nominalists  (1:121-25).  He  even  entertains  doubts  about  there  being  pre- 
cisely ten  Aristotelian  categories,  but  in  the  end  acknowledges  the  usefulness 
of  their  number  by  referring  to  the  same  Aristotle  and  to  the  use  of  his  cat- 
egories in  the  schools  for  centuries:  Sentiendum  ita  equidem  cum  paucis,  sed  loquen- 
dum  cum  multis  (1:126). 

The  logic  is  brought  to  a  traditional  as  well  as  a  systematically  consequen- 
tial conclusion  with  a  treatise  de  scientia.  Science  does  not  only  mean  know- 
ledge through  causes  but  also  knowing  why  and  to  what  extent  a  cause  is  a 
cause.  With  this  addendum,  the  evidence  of  a  clearly  perceived  and  recog- 
nized cause  (evidentia  in  causa  dare  cognita  etperspecta,  1 :216)  is  made  constitutive 
of  science,  and  it  permits  the  distinction  between  certainty  and  evidence,  since 


PAUL  RICHARD  BLUM  575 

certainty  is  also  valid  for  articles  of  faith  but  can  be  derived  from  evidence  as 
well.  Evidence  itself  can  arise  from  sensationes ,  from  other  immediate  know- 
ledge, from  the  connection  of  one  object  with  another  immediately  known  ob- 
ject, and  fmally  from  axioms  known  to  the  natural  light  (1:217).  These 
explanations  sound  very  Cartesian,  and  it  seems  as  if  the  author  wants  to  sway 
us  from  this  track  when  he  presents  the  visio  beatifica  as  the  concluding  example 
of  the  last  type  of  evidence  (1:217).  The  importance  that  Cornaeus  assigns  ev- 
idence in  scientific  activity  lies  entirely  beyond  scholastic  Aristotelianism.  In 
the  latter,  being  adequate  to  the  object  was  always  the  highest  guarantee  of 
being  scientific,  and  there  was  no  need  to  view  the  evidence  of  scientific  state- 
ments as  being  problematic  and  requiring  further  investigation;  rather,  since 
Aristotle,  evidence  had  been  regarded  as  a  means  of  topic  argumentation.  Con- 
sequently, it  is  no  longer  surprising  that  Cornaeus  at  the  end  considers  the 
division  of  the  sciences  according  to  their  objects  to  be  artificial  (1:224);  nor 
is  it  surprising  that  he  cannot  derive  the  unity  of  each  science  — logic,  physics, 
metaphysics  — from  their  respective  level  of  abstraction  from  the  material.  He 
can  only  consider  this  traditional  division  to  be  valid  for  the  main  objects  of 
the  different  sciences  (1:225  f.). 

Even  in  metaphysics,  Cornaeus  does  not  regard  abstraction  to  be  constit- 
utive with  respect  to  its  object.^  Consequently,  metaphysics  also  does  not  con- 
stitute its  own  object.  Of  course,  the  object  of  metaphysics  is  the  ens  reale  in 
quantum  ens.  This  Being  is  not  to  be  seen  in  its  formal  distinctiveness'',  but 
rather  according  to  its  given  concept  in  each  case,  inclusive  of  all  levels.^  Thus 
our  author  does  not  want  to  present  metaphysics  as  a  pure  science  of  Being 
but  as  the  science  which  encompasses  everything,  and  the  latter  not  simply 
as  Being  but  also  as  particular  Being,  as  Being  of  a  specific  kind  in  each  case. 

The  theoretical  advantages  of  this  view  can  especially  be  seen  in  Cornaeus' 
doctrine  of  substance  and  accidence  in  which  he  follows  the  doctrine  of  "the 
modes  of  being"  as  conceived  by  Duns  Scotus  and  Suarez.  He  defines  modalitas 
as  actualis  determinatio  alicujus  rei  in  aliquo  genere  (2:381):  for  example,  the  "where" 
is  the  actual  determination  of  an  individual  object  to  exist  in  a  particular  space. 
He  regards  modality  as  an  instrument  that  enables  the  description  of  extra- 
mental  reality  as  extramental.^  He  understands  modus  to  be  a  metaphysical 
concept  that  enables  him  to  tack  on  ontologically  concrete  nature  and  empir- 
ical physics  to  the  substance/accidence  doctrine.  Precisely  by  means  of  the  no- 
minalistically  conceived  doctrine  of  abstraction,  he  succeeds  in  presenting 
metaphysics  in  such  a  manner  that  it  does  not  make  the  empirically  given  na- 
ture theoretically  unattainable;  or  conversely,  he  succeeds  in  attaching  em- 
pirical investigations  of  nature  onto  metaphysics.'^ 

The  doctrine  of  the  soul  cannot  be  limited  to  the  distinctions  and  potencies 
of  the  soul,  but  rather,  it  must  also  investigate  the  possible  disturbances  that 
may  arise  during  the  operation  of  the  thinking  soul.''  Since  this  especially 
concerns  the  faculty  of  sight,  the  doctrine  of  the  soul  switches  into  optics,  which 


576  SCIENCE  AND  SCHOLASTICISM  IN  MELCHIOR  CORNAEUS  SJ 

is  treated  by  Cornaeus  in  a  physics  of  light  (2:173-85),  in  a  physiology  of  vi- 
sion (2:185-200),  and  in  an  anatomy  of  the  eye  accordig  to  Vesalius 
(2:200-208).  He  concludes  the  entire  discussion  with  a  series  o{  axiomata  optica 
(2:208-35)  with  many  diagrams  and  sketches  of  perspective  and  perspective 
distortions  (2:211-21).  Cornaeus,  thereby,  definitively  oversteps  the  boundar- 
ies of  the  philosophy  course,  since  optics  obviously  belongs  to  mathematics. 

The  scientific  and  theoretical  ambivalence  manifests  itself  in  the  physics  in 
a  double  game  with  Aristotle  between  loyalty  and  infiltration,  immediately  be- 
ginning with  the  category  of  quantity.  Cornaeus  gives  an  account  of  that  de- 
finition of  quantity  which  is  based  on  divisibility  but  then  criticises  it  as  a  mere 
description,  that  is,  a  quality  which  first  ensues  from  the  essence  of  quantity, 
namely  from  impenetrability  (1:140).^^  Quantity  as  impenetrability  has  far- 
reaching  consequences  for  physics  because  it  implies  the  Averroistic  doctrine 
of  the  dimensionality  of  matter, ^^  which  was  combated  by  Thomas,  as  well 
as  the  precedence  of  quantity  and  dimensionality  over  the  body;  perhaps  it 
even  initiates  the  concept  of  dimensional  space. 

One  can  see  in  Cornaeus'  doctrine  of  elements  that  he  was  well  aware  of 
this  danger:  he  presents  a  long  series  of  arguments  for  the  thesis  that  lightness 
{levitas)  is  not  a  quality  independent  from  heaviness  but  is  only  the  privation 
of  the  latter  and  that  heaviness  is  perhaps  not  even  a  quality  distinguishable 
from  the  materia  prima,  that  is,  quantity  (2: 100-107).  After  reaching  the  proofs 
conclusion,  however,  he  adds  that  this  had  actually  been  his  own  opinion  and 
doctrine,  too,  but  now  majorum  auctoritas^'^  has  directed  him  to  teach  that  both 
are  positive  qualities,  which  he  dutifully  does,  following  Riccoli  (2: 107).  Thus, 
he  now  understands  gravitas  to  hefacultas  quaedam  tendendi  ad  centrum,  eaque  omnia 
pene  elementa  et  pleraque  mixta  praedita  sunt,  et  de  facto  ad  centrum  deorsum  tendunt, 
nisi  aliunde  impediantur  (2:110).  One  may  not  overlook  the  fact  that  this  is  also 
not  a  pure  Aristotelian  doctrine  since  natural  place  is  not  being  discussed  here; 
instead,  "almost  all  of  the  elements"  are  striving  towards  the  center  of  the  world. 

Like  a  number  of  his  predecessors,  Cornaeus  solves  the  problem  of  the  Aris- 
totelian concept  of  place  with  the  help  of  the  concept  of  spatium  imaginarium, 
imagined  space.  ^^  Although  this  is  a  pure  mental  product,  it  is  nevertheless 
well-suited  for  solving  several  apories  of  the  Aristotelian  concept  of  place,  with- 
out deviating  from  the  latter's  doctrine  as  the  Schoolmen  do.  The  concrete  ubi 
is  transferred  into  this  imaginary  space,  and,  similar  to  the  Aristotelian  place, 
it  is  a  physical  and  real  something  whose  essence  can  only  be  explained  and 
understood,  and  can  actually  only  exist  through  the  aid  of  the  same  spatium 
imaginarium  conceived  as  being  firm  and  immovable  (1:366).  With  the  concept 
of  the  intellectual  "where,"  one  can  conceive  corporeal  substance  as  being  in- 
different in  relation  to  pure  imaginary  space.  The  fixation  that  exists  between 
the  body  and  its  container  according  to  Aristotle  is  now  transferred  onto  the 
relation  between  the  "where"  and  space  that  is  pure  nothingness.  By  this  means, 
one  can  freely  speak  of  the  dimensionality  of  space  and  the  dimensional  lo- 


PAUL  RICHARD  BLUM  577 

calization  of  the  body  in  space  without  the  danger  of  falling  into  a 
materialism  —  a  danger  existing  when  one  exclusively  fastens  dimension  to  ma- 
terial that  then  would  have  to  be  eternal.  On  the  very  same  grounds,  the  afore- 
mentioned defmition  of  quantity  as  impenetrability  is  also  no  longer  in  danger 
of  being  materialistically  interpreted  (1:367-68). 

The  fruits  of  this  subdety  can  immediately  be  harvested  in  the  quaestio  con- 
cerning vacuum.  Of  course  a  vacuum,  according  to  Aristotie,  is  not  possible 
in  a  natural  way.  But  the  "imaginary  space"  does  make  thought  experiments 
(1 :379-80)  possible:  what  would  occur  if  there  were  a  real  vacuum  ?  Cornaeus 
discusses  instruments  for  the  production  and  application  of  vacuums  and 
thermometers  (1:380-83),  the  Torricelli/Berti  experiment  with  the  vacuum, 
as  well  as  the  one  carried  out  by  Otto  von  Guericke,  both  well-known  at  the 
time.^^  Cornaeus  reports  that  he  himself  had  seen  such  experiments  (1:396, 
398,  402).^^  He  promptly  expresses  the  quintessence  of  his  presentations  in 
the  first  sentence  of  his  description  of  the  instruments:  Libet  hoc  loco  curiosa  quae- 
dam  Theoremata  proponere,  quae  vacui  sive  naturam  sive  impossibilitatem  comprobant. 
He  is  undoubtedly  dealing  with  curiosa,  that  is  with  things  that  do  not  belong 
in  theoretical  physics.  Above  all,  however,  he  leaves  it  open  as  to  whether  or 
not  these  instruments  prove  the  essence  of  the  vacuum  or  rather  its  impos- 
sibility. Cornaeus  believes  that  they  prove  the  old  doctrine  of  the  metus  vacui 
(1:393),  which,  however,  only  means  the  reversal  of  the  argumentation  and 
not  a  contesting  of  the  physical  value  of  the  experiments  sketched.  Charac- 
teristic for  the  entire  section  on  the  vacuum  is  the  comment  (1:399):  Omnis 
novitas  jucunda  esse  solet,  sed  Veritas  antiqua  melior;  for  Cornaeus,  too,  traditional 
truth  and  the  attractiveness  of  the  new  clash  with  each  other. 

In  the  treatment  of  divisibility,  we  fmd  the  culmination  of  the  author's  phil- 
osophic dissimulation.  Page  after  page,  he  proves  the  traditional  doctrine  that 
the  continuum  is  not  in  any  respect  assembled  out  of  individualistic  units,  but 
he  distinguishes  between  indivisible  physicum  and  indivisible  mathematicum  (1 :454, 
438).  That  is  why  the  entire  line  of  reasoning  is  only  valid  for  the  mathe- 
matically indivisible  units;  the  continuum,  on  the  other  hzind,  can  very  well 
be  assembled  out  of  physically  indivisible  units,  namely,  that  which  is  indeed 
theoretically  {a  Deo)  divisible  but  which  in  reality  can  be  neither  perceived  nor 
divided  because  of  its  smallness.  With  the  help  of  this  distinction  and  this  se- 
quence of  arguments,  the  real  grounds  are  withdrawn  from  all  atomistic  theses 
without  completely  excluding  their  use  for  practical  application  in  physics. 

The  mathematical  indivisibility  speculation  was  preceded  by  an  extensive 
treatise  concerning  infmity  (1:348-55).  Referring  to  Clavius,^^  but  not  allud- 
ing to  Galileo, ^^  Cornaeus  insists  that  all  infmite  quantities  are  the  same  al- 
though they  seem  to  be  different. ^^  As  in  the  other  examples,  we  fmd  in  the 
structures  of  argumentation  here  the  attempt  to  hold  together  on  the  theore- 
tical level  the  conceptual  character  and  the  experimental  data. 

The  difficulties  of  this  manner  of  argumentation  are  cilways  revealed  when 


578  SCIENCE  AND  SCHOLASTICISM   IN  MELCHIOR  CORNAEUS  SJ 

—  as  with  gravitation  —  the  conceptual  character  is  officially  documented.  That 
is  why  Cornaeus,  in  writing  about  the  astronomical  research  of  his  time,  using 
Christoph  Scheiner  as  reference, ^^  helps  himself  out  by  quoting  for  the  length 
of  four  pages  theses  and  philosophical  arguments  from  the  first  book  of  Nik- 
olaus  Copernicus'  De  revolutionibus  (so  that  every  reader  can  dispense  with  a 
reading  of  the  original  text  for  the  time  being  without  misgivings),  only  to  re- 
fute them  in  the  scholastic  manner.  He  then  adds  an  admonishing  report  on 
the  ban  of  Copernicanism,  including  the  case  of  Galileo, ^'^  from  which  it  fol- 
lows that  the  Copernican  viewpoint  cannot  be  represented  or  defended  by 
Catholics  — not  in  public  in  any  case,  but  as  far  as  possible  not  internally 
either.  ^^ 

All  this  does  not  occasion  a  history  of  denunciation  since  we  have  to  assume 
that  the  Jesuit  acted  in  good  conscience  and  according  to  the  best  of  his  know- 
ledge when  he  tried  to  comply  with  the  needs  of  modern  research  into  nature, 
without  deviating  from  the  text  of  Aristotle  and  that  of  his  Order  superiors. 
One  can  see  this  in  a  final  example,  in  his  solution  of  the  antinomies  of  time 
and  eternity  that  result  from  the  collision  of  the  timeliness  of  the  world  (the 
finiteness  of  things  following  one  after  the  other,  for  example,  the  generations 
of  mankind)  with  the  totality  of  temporal  eternity  (the  species  of  man)(l:472 
f.).  These  contradictions  remain  unsolvable  if  the  infinite  regress  is  not  ended 
in  God,  following  the  Aristotelian  scheme.  Precisely  for  Aristotle,  the  infinite 
chain  of  succession  is  the  most  secure  proof  of  God  (1:483).  The  world,  how- 
ever, is  created  ""de  facto"  in  time  (1:484),  as  the  Bible  teaches.  But  by  having 
shown  in  his  speculation  concerning  the  apories  of  infinity  in  time  that  the  eter- 
nity of  the  world  is  theoretically  possible  and  by  deducing  the  necessity  of  a 
Creator-God  from  this  at  the  same  time,  Cornaeus  shows  that  the  biblical 
solution  —  namely  that  the  world  had  come  into  being  and  is  transitory  —  is  ac- 
tuailly  the  better  Aristotelian  solution  than  the  one  which  Aristotle  himself  could 
find,  without  revelation.  The  analysis  of  the  concept  of  infinity,  as  it  is  presented 
by  Cornaeus,  thus  helps  him  to  overcome  the  old  problem  of  the  double  truth. 
He  is  not  dependent  upon  setting  quotations  from  Thomas  Aquinas  and  from 
the  Bible  up  against  the  pertinent  text  passages  from  Aristotle  and  explicating 
the  philosophical  implications  of  the  theological  thesis,  as  was  traditionally  done; 
instead,  he  now  can  actually  put  Aristotle  to  rights. ^^ 

Thus  we  see  how  Cornaeus  endeavors  to  extend  and  uphold  as  far  as  pos- 
sible the  achievements  in  theoretical  explanation  accomplished  in  the  Aristo- 
telian philosophy  of  nature  and  that  he  does  this  because  he  is  unwilling  to 
resist  the  enticements  of  modern  natural  science.  In  this  way,  he  "Aristoteli- 
ses"  experimental  physics  and  experiments  in  the  philosophy  course. 

Freie  Universitat,  Berlin 


PAUL  RICHARD  BLUM  579 

Notes 


1.  Melchior  Cornaeus  SJ  (Brilon  1598-Mainz  1665)  was  a  Professor  of  Philosophy 
in  Toulouse  during  the  Thirty  Years  War  and  later  taught  theology  in  Wiirzburg  and 
Mainz.  In  Mainz  he  was  First  Professor  for  Scholastic  Theology  from  1643  to  1649 
and  became  Rektor  of  the  College  in  1664:  Fritz  Krafft,  Jesuiten  als  Lehrer  an  Gym- 
nasium und  Universitat  Mainz  .  .  .,  in  Tradition  und  Gegenwart,  Studien  und  Quellen  zur 
Geschichte  der  Universitat  Mainz  I  (Wiesbaden,  1977),  pp.  259-350,  here  330.  Most  of 
his  writings  are  anti- Lutheran  polemics,  especially  against  the  Strafeborg  theologian  Jo- 
hann  Georg  Dorsch(e,  -aeus)  (1597-1659);  this  also  holds  for  Cornaeus'  treatise,  Aris- 
toteles  redivivus  Romano-Catholicus,  Herbipoli  (Zinck)  1652  (and  other  edd.)  Aloys  de  Backer 
SJ/Carlos  Sommervogel  SJ,  Bibliotheque  de  la  Compagnie  de  Jesus,  12  Vols.,  (Paris 
1890-1930;  Rpt.  Heverlee-Louvain,  1960),  s.v.  Joh.  Suibert  Seibertz,  WestfaUsche 
Beitrage  zur  Deutschen  Geschichte  I,  Darmstadt  (Tasche)  1819,  s.v.  (Microfiche  in 
Deutsches  Biographisches  Archiv). 

2.  628  and  427  p.  4°^;  in  the  following  quoted  with  1  or  2  and  page.  The  edition 
Herbipoli  (Joh.  Hertz)  1675  is  probably  a  title-page  edition/unrevised  edition. 

3.  ad  captum  omnium,  etiam  imbecillium. 

4.  For  example,  Rodericus  de  Arriaga  SJ,  Cursus  philosophicus,  Antverpiae  (Plantin) 
1632,  Disp.  Coel.,  sect.  6,  §71,  p.  508. 

5.  Francisus  Suarez  SJ,  Disputationes  Metaphysicae ,  Salamanca  1597  (and  others;  re- 
print in  Suarez,  Opera  omnia  25/26,  Paris  (Vives)  1866;  (a  reprint  of  this  Hildesheim, 
1965);  disp.  54  de  entibus  rationis,  sect.  2  n.  15,  p.  1022a. —Petrus  Hurtadus  de  Men- 
doza  SJ,  Disputationes  de  universa  Philosophia,  Lyon  (Pillehotte)  1617. 

6.  cave  tamen  ideo  dicas  objectum  ejusformale  consistere  in  nescio  qua  abstractione  et  reali  et  ra- 
tionis, a  materia  et  sensibili  et  intelligibili;  2:330. 

7.  prout  omnino  formaliter  praecisum,  2:330. 

8.  Immaterial  substance,  God,  and  angels  can  thus  be  found  in  Cornaeus' 
metaphysics  —  something  which  cannot  be  taken  for  granted  since  many  of  his  colleagues, 
in  looking  towards  theology,  forego  the  treatment  of  abstract  substances. 

9.  2:376:  quia  nemine  cogitante  res  ibi  est,  ubi  ante  nan  erat. 

10.  Cornaeus'  contemporary  and  fellow  Jesuit,  Compton  Carleton,  used  the  same 
doctrines  in  order  to  defend  the  scholastic  philosophy  against  Cartesianism:  Thomas 
Comptonus  Carleton  SJ,  Philosophia  universa,  Antverpiae  (Meursius)  1664  (1st  ed.  1649), 
p.  255. 

1 1 .  In  accordance  with  this  is  the  fact  that  Cornaeus,  following  the  Scotists  and  No- 
minalists, does  not  allow,  as  he  himself  states,  that  a  distinction  be  made  between  the 
soul  and  its  potencies  (Omnes  illas  potentias  ab  anima  ejusque  entitate  distingui  tantum  ratione 
ratiocinata,  2: 152);  this  is  because  all  operations  of  the  soul  can  be  performed  by  its  own 
substance  {cum  omnes  operationes  abunde possint praestari  ab  ipsa  animae  substantia,  ibid.).  With 
that,  of  course,  the  meanings  of  potency  and  act,  of  faculty  and  activity,  of  potentiality 
and  actuality  slide  into  each  other,  and  by  this  means,  the  substance  of  the  soul  pos- 
sibly obtains  an  entirely  new  dignity  (perhaps  as  res  cogitans)  against  the  corpore2il  sub- 
stance. At  any  rate,  this  cannot  be  further  shown  using  Cornaeus'  text. 

12.  Benedictus  Pererius  SJ,  De  communibus  rerum  principiis  libri  XV,  Lugduni  (Porta) 
1588  (1st  ed.  Rom  1576),  lib.  10,  chap.  2,  p.  551. 

\3.  De  natura  materiae  et  dimensionibus  interminatis ,  in  Thomas  de  Aquino,  Opuscula  phil- 
osophica,  ed.  Spiazzi  (Turini  1954),  esp.  chap.  4-6.  Also  Cosmas  Alamanni  SJ,  Summa 


580  SCIENCE  AND  SCHOLASTICISM   IN  MELCHIOR  CORNAEUS  SJ 

totius  Philosophiae  e  D.  Thomae  Aquinatis  Doctoris  Angelici  doctrina,  2nd  ed.  (Paris  1639/40, 
reprint  of  6  parts  in  3  vols.,  Paris  1885-94);  here:  Logic,  q.  9,  resp.,  p.  137. 

14.  This  refers  to  the  Ordinatio  pro  Studiis  Superioribus,  which  was  decreed  by  the  9th 
General  Congregation  (1649/50)  and  published  by  the  General  of  the  Order,  Francis- 
cus  Piccolomini,  in  1651;  the  Ordinatio  is  in  G.  M.  Pachtler,  ed..  Ratio  Studiorum  et  In- 
stitutiones  Scholasticae Societatis Jesu per  Germaniam  olim  vigentes,  vol.  3,  no.  42  (Berlin,  1890) 
(  =  Monumenta  Germaniae  Paedagogica  9),  here  p.  93,  §41 :  Gravitas  et  levitas  non  differunt  spe- 
cie, sed  tantum  secundum  magis  et  minus  (as  one  of  the  propositiones  non  docendae). 

15.  Almagestum  (s.  n.  24)  lib.  9,  see  4,  chap.  16,  n.  3.4.5,  p.  383  f.;  cf.:  chap.  25,  n.  4. 

16.  Edward  Grant,  Much  Ado  about  Nothing,  Theories  of  Space  and  Vacuum  from  the  Mid- 
dle Ages  to  the  Scientific  Revolution  (Cambridge,  1981),  esp.  chap.  6  and  7. 

17.  From  De  vacuo  narratio  Ae.  P.  de  Roberval  ad  nobilissimum  virum  D.  de  Noyers,  in  Oev- 
res  de  Blaise  Pascal,  ed.  Brunschvicg,  vol.  2,  (Paris  1908),  p.  21-35.  Emmanuel  Maig- 
nan  OMin,  Cursus philosophicus ,  (Tolosae  [Bosc]  1652);  Caspar  Schott  SJ  reports  on  this 
(see  following  note).  Concerning  Maignan  see  P.  J.  S.  Whitmore,  The  Order  of  Minims 
in  Seventeenth-Century  France,  (The  Hague  1967)  (  =  Archives  Internationales  d'histoire  des 
ideas  20),  chap.  4,  esp.  173  f.  Cf.  C.  de  Waard,  L'experience  barometrique,  ses  antecedents 
et  ses  explications,  (Thouars  1936). 

18.  Caspar  Schottus  SJ,  Mechanica  hydraulico-pneumatica,  Francofurti  (Schon wetter, 
printed  in  Wiirzburg  by  Pigrin)  1657,  reports  that,  at  the  Wiirzburg  court  of  Johann 
Philipp  von  Schonborn  (to  whom  this  book  is  also  dedicated),  these  experiments  were 
re-examined  and  discussed  and  that  Cornaeus  also  had  participated  in  this  (451  f.); 
he  makes  reference  to  the  latter's  Cursus  (309)  and  reprints  from  this  the  presentation 
of  the  second  experiment,  the  Experimentum  Magdeburgicum  (466-84). 

19.  One  of  the  doctrines  that  was  prohibited  by  F.  Piccolomini  (see  note  14,  here: 
p.  92  §25)  reads  so:  Continuum  successivum  et  intensio  qualitatum  solis  indivisibilibus  constant. 

20.  Euclidis elementorum  libriXV{.  .  .)  illustrati  Auctore  Christophoro  Clavio,  4th  ed., 
(Rom,  1574;  Romae  [Zannettus],  1603,  lib.  1,  axioma  10,  vol.  1,  p.  68  f. 

21 .  Discorsi  e  dimostrazioni  mathematiche ,  (Leiden  1638),  in  Galileo  Galilei,  Le  Opere  (Ediz- 
ione  Nazionale),  (Firenze  1968),  vol.  8,  here:  Giorn.  1,  68  ff. 

22.  The  same  trope  of  argumentation,  distinction  between  actual  infinity  and  the 
absolute  godly  infinity,  was  used  by  Cornaeus  in  his  Apologeticon  for  Athanasius  Kircher, 
and  with  this  he  deactivated  the  mystical  potency  in  the  latter's  treatise,  which  was  his 
intention:  Athanasius  Kircherus  SJ,  Iter  exstaticum  coeleste,  ed.  Caspar  Schottus  SJ,  (Her- 
bipoh  [Endter],  1660),  f.  509-12,  esp.  prop.  1  and  2;  in  addition:  John  E.  Fletcher, 
Astronomy  in  the  Life  and  Correspondence  of  Athanasius  Kircher,  in:  Isis  61  (1970),  pp.  52-67, 
here  59. 

23.  Christophorus  Scheiner  SJ,  Rosa  Ursina,  (Bracciani  [Phaeus],  1630).  Comp.  Joh. 
Schreiber  SJ,  P.  Christoph  Scheiner,  SJ  und  seine  Sonnenbeobachtungen,  in:  Natur 
und  Offenbarung  48  (1902)  1-21,  78-93,  145-58,  209-21. 

24.  According  to  the  most  important  representative  of  the  anti-Gzdileo  campaign, 
Johannes  Baptista  Riccioli,  Almagestum  novum  astronomiam  veterem  novamque  complectens, 
(Bononiae  [Benatius]  1651),  1.9  sect.  4,  chap.  40. 

25.  Ex  quo  apparet,  eam  opinionem,  inforo  externa  nullo  modo,  in  interno  autem  vix  vix  a  quo- 
quam  Catholico  teneri  et  defendi  posse.  1:537. 

26.  Antonius  Goudin  OP,  for  example,  proceeds  much  more  naively  in  his  Philo- 
sophiajuxta  inconcussa,  tutissimaque  Divi  Thomae  dogmata,  (1692;  Venetiis  [Lovisa],  1736), 
vol.  3,  Phys.  2,  9.1,  art.  3. 


Uberlegungen 

zur  moralistischen  Literatur 

des  italienischen  Renaissance-Humanismus 

August  Buck 

Es  gehort  zu  den  wesentlichen  Verdiensten  der  von  der  "Internatio- 
nalen  Gesellschaft  zur  Forderung  der  neulateinischen  Studien"  veran- 
stalteten  Kongresse,  zur  Uberwindung  eines  zahlebigen  Vorurteils 
beigetragen  zu  haben;  des  Vorurteils,  wonach  die  neulateinische  Literatur  der 
Humanisten  eine  wirklichkeitsfremde  esoterische  Kunstiibung  gewesen  sei,  ein 
isoliertes  Phanomen,  das  ohne  Einflufi  und  damit  ohne  Nachwirkung  auf  die 
nationalsprachlichen  Literaturen  geblieben  ist.  Diese  irrige  Auffassung  ist  zu 
widerlegen  durch  die  zahlreichen  Beispiele  fiir  die  Integration  von  Themen 
und  Formen  der  neulateinischen  Literatur  der  Humanisten  in  die  zeitgenos- 
sische  nationalliterarische  Entwicklung.  Als  ein  solches  Beispiel  wollen  sich  un- 
sere  folgenden  Ausfiihrungen  verstanden  wissen. 

Wenn  wir  den  von  uns  ausgewahlten  Bereich  der  neulateinischen  Literatur 
der  italienischen  Renaissance  unter  dem  Begriff  moralistische  Literatur  sub- 
sumiert  haben,  bedarf  es  zunachst  einer  Begriffsbestimmung.  Ohne  den  Be- 
griff zu  verwenden,  hat  bereits  Hegel  in  seinen  Vorlesungen  iiber  die  Geschichte 
der  Philosophie  die  moralistische  Literatur  in  ihren  wichtigsten  Ziigen  charak- 
terisiert  und  zwar  im  Hinblick  auf  einige  ihrer  nationalsprachlichen  Vertreter, 
als  er  von  Montaigne,  Charron  und  Machiavelli  aussagte,  sie  hatten  "aus  sich 
selbst,  aus  ihrem  Bewufitsein,  ihrer  Erfahrung,  Beobachtung,  ihrem  Leben 
geschopft"  und  bei  ihnen  fanden  sich  "geistreiche  Gedanken  iiber  sich,  iiber 
das  menschliche  Leben,  die  gesellschaftlichen  Verhaltnisse,  iiber  das  Rechte, 
Gute";  kurz,  es  handle  sich  um  "eine  Lebens-Philosophie  aus  dem  Kreise  der 
menschlichen  Erfahrung,  wie  es  in  der  Welt,  im  Herzen,  im  Geiste  des  Men- 
schen  zugeht."' 

Als  spater  Wilhelm  Dilthey  diese  mit  der  Renaissance  neu  aufkommende 
Form  der  Anthropologic,  "in  welcher  menschliches  Innere,  Charaktere,  Pas- 
sionen,  Temperamente  geschildert  und  der  Reflexion  unterworfen  werden,"^ 
mit  dem  Riickgriff  der  Humanisten  auf  die  antiken  Autoren  in  Verbindung 
brachte,  war  die  Grundlage  gegeben,  auf  der  die  von  Hugo  Friedrich  for- 


582       MORALISTISCHE  LITERATUR  DES  ITALIENISCHEN   RENAISSANCE-HUMANISMUS 

mulierte  und  von  uns  ubernommene  Definition  der  moralistischen  Literatur, 
verkiirzt  der  Moralistik,  beruht.  Sie  ist  die  unsystematische  Beschreibung  "aller 
Erscheinungsweisen  des  Menschen  in  seelischer,  sitdicher,  sittengeschichtiicher, 
gesellschafdicher,  politischer  Hinsicht,  jeweils  nach  den  Verschiedenheiten  der 
Raume  und  Zeiten,"^  wobei  — so  diirfen  wir  mit  Friedrichs  Schiiler  Jiirgen 
von  Stackelberg  erganzen  —  "der  Rekurs  auf  die  Antike  .  .  .  eine  grofie  Rolle 
gespielt  hat."'^ 

Aus  dieser  Definition  der  Moralistik  geht  hervor,  dafi  ihre  Vertreter,  die 
Moralisten,  weder  Moralphilosophen  noch  Sittenlehrer  sind,  vielmehr  entspre- 
chend  der  Bedeutung  des  franzosischen  Begriffs  "moraliste":  "auteurs  de  refle- 
xions sur  les  moeurs,  sur  la  nature  de  la  condition  humaine."^  Nietzsche,  der 
bekanntlich  die  franzosischen  Moralisten  sehr  geschatzt  hat,  nannte  sie  tref- 
fend  "Menschenpriifer."^  Wie  Nietzsche  denkt  man,  der  "opinio  communis" 
folgend,— nicht  nur  in  Deutschland  —  an  eine  Gruppe  franzosischer  Autoren 
von  Montaigne  bis  Joubert,  deren  Leben  in  einer  Zeitspanne  vom  spaten  16. 
bis  zum  friihen  19.  Jahrhundert  fallt.  Man  sollte  sie  besser  Moralisten  im  en- 
geren  Sinn  nennen;  denn  als  Moralisten  im  weiteren  Sinn  kann  auch  eine  Reihe 
italienischer  Humanisten  angesprochen  werden,  insofern  sie  ebenfalls  "Men- 
schenpriifer"  gewesen  sind.  Obwohl  es  in  der  einschlagigen  Fachliteratur  nicht 
an  Hinweisen  darauf  fehlt,  dafi  in  den  franzosischen  Moralisten  die  Anthro- 
pologic des  italienischen  Renaissance-Humanismus  fortlebt  und  Hugo  Fried- 
rich  den  Beweis  fiir  Montaigne  im  einzelnen  erbracht  hat,  hat  man,  abgesehen 
von  gewissen  Ansatzen,  bisher,  soweit  uns  bekannt,  noch  nicht  versucht,  die 
moralistische  Tradition  im  italienischen  Humanismus  von  Petrarca  bis  Guic- 
ciardini  zu  verfolgen,  in  der  sich  bereits  der  Ubergang  von  der  neulateini- 
schen  zur  volkssprachlichen  Literatur,  der  Prozefi  der  Integration  des 
neulateinischen  Erbes  in  die  nationalliterarische  Entv^icklung  anbahnt. 

Die  Moralistik  beruht  auf  dem  humanistischen  Interesse  am  Menschen,  ent- 
springt  einem  psychologischen  Phanomen,  das  man  seit  Jacob  Burckhardt  die 
"Entdeckung  des  Menschen"  zu  nennen  pflegt.  Trotz  aller  gegen  Burckhardts 
Interpretation  der  Renaissance  vorgebrachten  Einwande  ist  nicht  zu  bestrei- 
ten,  dafi  mit  der  Renaissance  eine  neue  Sensibilitat  gegeniiber  dem  Le- 
bensphanomen  erwachte.  Zuerst  in  Italien  wurde  der  Mensch  "geistiges 
Individuum  und  entdeckte  sich  als  solches."^  "Ego  sum  unus  utinamque  in- 
teger," erklarte  Petrarca.  ^^  Mit  dem  Bewufitwerden  der  eigenen  Individua- 
litat  wird  diese  zum  Gegenstand  der  Selbstbeobachtung. 

Wahrend  das  Mittelalter  sich  fur  den  Menschen  im  Hinblick  auf  das  die 
ganze  Menschheit  betreffende  Heilsstreben,  das  "exire  a  saeculo"  interessiert 
hatte,  gewinnt  nunmehr  das  individuelle  Leben  als  solches  eine  Eigenbedeu- 
tung.  Man  fragt  nicht  mehr  in  erster  Linie,  woher  der  Mensch  kommt  und 
wohin  er  geht,  sondern  was  der  Mensch  ist  und  was  er  erlebt.  Die  Frage,  zuerst 
dem  eigenen  Ich  gestellt,  wird  dann  an  die  fremde  Individualitat  gerichtet  so- 
wohl  in  der  Gegenwart  als  auch  in  der  Geschichte.  So  zeitigt  die  Entdeckung 


AUGUST  BUCK  583 

des  Individuums  den  ungewohnlichen  Aufschwung,  den  Biographic  und  Auto- 
biographie  in  der  Renaissance  erlebt  haben.  Insofern  beide  Gattungen  ein 
bestimmtes  Individuum  in  seinen  Eigenschaften  und  Verhaltensweisen  be- 
schreiben,  sind  sie,  abgesehen  von  eventuellen  Werturteilen,  sozusagen  Vor- 
stufen  der  Moralistik,  die  von  der  Analyse  des  Individuums  zur  Beschreibung 
des  Menschen  als  solchem  fortschreitet. 

In  den  Anfangen  der  Moralistik  in  Italien  erfolgen  deren  menschenkund- 
liche  Aussagen  im  Rahmen  der  umfangreichen  moralphilosophischen  Literatur, 
die  der  italienische  Humanismus  hervorgebracht  hat  und  die  von  ihrem  besten 
Kenner,  Paul  Oskar  Kristeller,  als  "ein  bedeutendes  historisches  Phanomen" 
bezeichnet  worden  ist.^*  Der  Mensch  in  seinem  Sosein  wird  also  beschrieben 
im  Zusammenhang  mit  seinem  SeinsoUen,  wird  unter  zwei  verschiedenen  Per- 
spektiven  betrachtet,  der  moralistischen  und  der  moralphilosophischen,  die  man 
auch  die  realistische  und  die  idealistische  nennen  konnte. 

Da  zwischen  beiden  Betrachtungsweisen  reziproke  Beziehungen  bestehen  — 
Girolamo  Cardano  hielt  die  Kenntnis  der  Sitten  sogar  fur  einen  Teil  der 
Moralphilosophie^^  — stellt  sich  zunachst  die  Frage  nach  der  RoUe  der  Mo- 
ralphilosophie  im  italienischen  Humanismus.  Sie  bestimmte  den  humanisti- 
schen  Bildungsbegriff  des  durch  das  Studium  der  antiken  Autoren  bewirkten 
"recte  vivere,"  die  Erziehung  zum  sittlich  handelnden  Menschen.  Daher  preist 
Guarino  da  Verona  in  einer  Inauguralrede  zur  Interpretation  von  Ciceros  De 
officiis  die  Moralphilosophie  als  das  Grofite,  ja  das  Gottlichste,  was  Menschen 
je  ersonnen  haben: 

nam  quid  praestabilius  cogitare  et  consequi  possumus  quam  eas  artes, 
ea  praecepta,  eas  disciplinas,  quibus  nos  ipsos,  quibus  rem  familiarem, 
quibus  civilia  negotia  regere,  disponere,  gubernare  liceat?  .  .  .  hinc  gravia 
in  agendis  consilia  captantur  et  rationis  inimica  temeritas  vitatur,  hinc 
fides,  constantia,  aequitas,  liberalitas,  in  nostros,  in  alienos,  in  omne  de- 
nique  hominum  genus  observantia  discitur.*^ 

Entsprechend  der  privilegierten  Stellung  der  Moralphilosophie  stiefien  ihre 
Probleme  bei  den  Humanisten  auf  ein  lebhaftes  Interesse.  Dabei  folgten  sie 
dem  Beispiel  Petrarcas,  welcher  der  Nach  welt  verkiindete:  "ad  moralem  pre- 
cipue  philosophiam  et  ad  poeticam  prono."^'^  Mit  Petrarca  beginnen  die  ita- 
lienischen Humanisten  Reflexionen  iiber  eine  Vielfalt  moralphilosophischer 
Themen  anzustellen.  Unter  haufiger  Berufung  auf  antike  Autoren  handeln 
sie  iiber  Tugenden  und  Laster,  iiber  die  Unterscheidung  von  ethischen  und 
dianoetischen  Tugenden  im  Hinblick  auf  die  ihnen  zugeordneten  Lebensfor- 
men  der  "vita  activa"  und  der  "vita  contemplativa,"  ferner  uber  den  Einflufi 
der  Affekte  auf  den  Willen,  iiber  den  Konflikt  zwischen  Vernunft  und  Lei- 
denschaft  und  immer  wieder  iiber  die  Grundfrage  der  menschlichen  Existenz, 
die  Frage  nach  dem  "summum  bonum." 

Obwohl  der  didaktische  Zweck,  die  Ermahnung  zu  einer  tugendhaften  Le- 


584      MORALISTISCHE  LITERATUR  DBS  ITALIENISCHEN  RENAISSANCE-HUMANISMUS 

bensfiihrung,  unter  Umstanden  verbunden  mit  praktischen  Anweisungen 
dominiert,  lassen  sich  — wie  Paul  Oskar  Kristeller  bemerkt  —  "Beschreiben  und 
Vorschreiben  .  .  .  nicht  immer  klar  auseinanderhalten,"^^  m.a.W.  die  norm- 
freie  Betrachtung  menschlichen  Verhaltens,  die  Moralistik,  und  die  morali- 
sche  Wertung  stehen  nebeneinander.  Im  Unterschied  zu  den  franzosischen 
Moralisten  hat  sich  bei  ihren  itaHenischen  Vorgangern  die  Schilderung  der 
Realitat  des  menschUchen  Lebens  noch  nicht  verselbstandigt,  ist  vielmehr  noch 
eingebettet  in  die  moralphilosophische  Fragestellung. 

Morahstik  und  Moralphilosophie  haben  gemeinsame  antike  Quellen.  Die 
Humanisten  fiihlten  sich  vor  allem  zu  der  Lebensphilosophie  des  Hellenis- 
mus  hingezogen.  Bei  Stoikern,  Epikureern  und  Skeptikern  fanden  sie  eine  ihnen 
besonders  zusagende  Art  des  Philosophierens,  das  vom  personHchen  Erleben 
ausgeht;  eine  Geistesverwandtschaft,  auf  die  seinerzeit  V.  Gronbech  in  seiner 
Studie  iiber  den  Hellenismus  aufmerksam  gemacht  hat.^^  Neben  der  helleni- 
stischen  Weisheitsethik  waren  die  ethischen  Schriften  des  Aristoteles  unent- 
behriich,  welche  der  Moralphilosophie  als  Lehrfach  an  den  Universitaten 
zugrunde  gelegt  werden.  Verglichen  mit  Aristoteles  wird  dagegen  Platon  nur 
relativ  selten  als  Quelle  fiir  die  antike  Ethik  herangezogen. 

Aus  der  antiken  Moralphilosophie  stammen  die  meisten  Begriffe,  mit  denen 
die  humanistische  Anthropologic  arbeitet.  Dieser  Begriffsschatz  wurde  erganzt 
durch  entsprechende  christliche  Begriffe,  die  ihrerseits  z.T.  der  antiken  Tra- 
dition entlehnt,  bzw.  nach  der  Entlehnung  umgeformt  worden  waren.  Eine 
besondere  Bedeutung  gewannen  die  Begriffe,  die  sich  auf  die  Auseinander- 
setzung  des  Menschen  mit  den  sein  Dasein  beeinflussenden  Machten,  also  auf 
seine  Fremdbestimmungbeziehen,  u.a.  "instabilitas,"  "constantia,"  "gloria,"  "vir- 
tus," "fatum"  und  "fortuna."  Diese  und  die  iibrigen  tradierten  Begriffe  werden 
aus  einer  veranderten  Bewufitseinshaltung  mit  einem  neuen  Sinn  erfiillt  und 
in  die  verschiedenartigen  Reflexionen  iiber  den  Menschen  eingebracht. 

Indem  die  Humanisten  zur  Wiedergabe  dieser  Reflexionen  die  bereits  in 
der  Antike  gebrauchlichen  sogenannten  offenen  Formen,  Dialog,  Brief,  Dia- 
tribe und  Aphorismus  bevorzugten,  gaben  sie  bewufit  die  in  der  Scholastik 
iibliche  systematische  Erorterung  auf  und  betrachteten  im  Zeichen  der  Sub- 
jektivitat  ihren  Gegenstand  von  verschiedenen  Seiten  her,  umkreisten  ihn  sozu- 
sagen,  ohne  die  Notwendigkeit,  ihn  vollig  auszuschopfen.  Es  ist  ein  Stil, 
erwachsen  aus  dem  Dialog,  den  die  Humanisten  mit  den  antiken  Autoren 
fiihren,  um  sich  von  ihnen  in  alien  Lebenslagen  beraten  zu  lassen  und  Aus- 
kunft  zu  erhalten  iiber  das,  was  der  Mensch  ist,  bzw.  sein  sollte.  Das  zwang- 
lose  Gesprach  mit  den  Gewahrspersonen  aus  dem  Alterum  wird  fortgesetzt 
im  Kreise  Gleichgesinnter.  Daher  war  auch  unter  den  zur  Verfiigung  stehenden 
offenen  Formen  am  beliebtesten  der  Dialog,  in  zweiter  Linie  der  Brief,  inso- 
fern  er  ein  Gesprach  mit  dem  Adressaten  darstellt.  Wahrend  der  Dialog  im 
Mittelalter  "nur  noch  eine  tote  Form"^^  war,  ist  er  durch  die  Humanisten 
wieder  verlebendigt  worden.  Das  mit  Abstand  wichtigste  antike  Vorbild  nennt 


AUGUST  BUCK  585 

Petrarca  im  Vorwort  zum  Secretum,  einem  der  friihesten  und  zugleich  be- 
deutendsten  humanistischen  Dialoge,  einem  fingierten  Zwiegesprach  mit  Au- 
gustin:  "Hunc  nempe  scribendi  morem  a  Cicerone  meo  didici."^^  Ciceros 
Einflufi  blieb  auch  dort  wirksam,  wo  man  auf  andere  Modelle  des  antiken  Dia- 
logs zuriickgriff.  Von  Cicero  stammt  das  die  meisten  humanistischen  Dialoge 
kennzeichnende  methodische  Prinzip  "in  utramque  partem  disserere,"  die  freie 
Diskussion  verschiedener,  ja  gegenteiliger  Meinungen.  Dabei  bestand  kein 
Zwang,  die  voneinander  abweichenden  Standpunkte  miteinander  harmoni- 
sieren  zu  miissen,  sondern  es  gab  einen  Freiraum  fur  die  Meinungsvielfalt 
entsprechend  dem  von  Petrarca  formulierten  Grundsatz:  "Suam  quisque  sen- 
tentiam  sequatur,  est  enim,  ut  nosti,  opinionum  varietas  libertasque  iudi- 
candi."'^ 

Nur  wenn  die  Vielfalt  der  Meinungen  im  Dialog  erortert  wird,  besteht  die 
Hoffnung,  die  Wahrheit  zu  Tage  zu  fordern.  "Nam  quid  est,  per  deos 
immortales,"  — so  fragt  Leonardo  Bruni  — 

quod  ad  res  subtiles  cognoscendas  atque  discutiendas  plus  valere  possit 
quam  disputatio,  ubi  rem  in  medio  positam  velut  oculi  plures  undique 
speculantur,  ut  in  ea  nihil  sit  quod  subterfugere,  nihil  quod  latere,  nihil 
quod  omnium  frustrari  intuitum?  .  .  .  Quid  est  quod  ingenium  magis 
acuat,  quid  quod  illud  callidius  versutiusque  reddat,  quam  disputatio, 
cum  necesse  sit  ut  momento  temporis  ad  rem  se  applicet,  indeque  se  re- 
flectat,  discurrat,  coUigat,  concludat?^^ 

Wo  das  "pro"  und  "contra"  erwogen  wird,  ohne  dafi  es  zu  einer  Entscheidung 
fur  die  eine  oder  die  andere  Position,  bzw.  zu  einem  Kompromifi  kommt,  liegt 
der  Grund  dafiir  wohl  nirgends  im  intellektuellen  Unvermogen  des  Autors 
und  nur  selten  in  dessen  Abneigung,  seine  eigene  Ansicht  preiszugeben,  wohl 
aber  in  der  Ambivalenz  gewisser  Lebensphanomene,  in  den  existentiellen  Pa- 
radoxien  im  menschlichen  Verhalten. 

Seine  Strukturierung  nach  dem  Prinzip  "in  utramque  partem  disserere" 
pradisponierte  den  Dialog  fiir  die  Diskussion  iiber  den  Menschen  aus  der 
moralphilosophischen  und  zugleich  der  moralistischen  Perspektive,  fiir  die  Ge- 
geniiberstellung  von  idealem  Anspruch  und  Realitat;  zwei  Positionen,  polari- 
siert  zum  Gegensatz  zwischen  "dignitas"  und  "miseria  hominis."  Sowohl  in  der 
antiken  Literatur  als  auch  in  der  Bibel  hatten  beide  Begriffe  dazu  gedient,  die 
Rangstellung  des  Menschen  in  der  Welt  zu  bestimmen.  Dem  nach  dem  Bilde 
Gottes  geschaffenen  Menschen,  der  iiber  die  Erde  herrscht,  hatte  man  den 
Menschen  als  das  hinfalligste  aller  Geschopfe  gegeniibergestellt.  Als  an  der 
Epochenwende  vom  Mittelalter  zur  Neuzeit  die  Renaissance  erneut  die  an- 
thropologische  Grundfrage  "was  ist  der  Mensch?"  stellte,  aktualisierte  man  die 
iiberlieferte  Thematik,  und  erganzte  sie  durch  weitere  Argumente.^* 

Wahrend  man  bis  dzihin  die  Wesenswiirde  des  Menschen  als  eine  in  der 
menschlichen  Natur  angelegte  Auszeichnung  betrachtet  hatte,  gab  der  Hu- 


586       MORALISTISCHE  LITERATUR  DES  ITALIENISCHEN  RENAISSANCE-HUMANISMUS 

manismus  der  "dignitas  hominis"  eine  dynamische  Interpretation.  Die  Hu- 
manisten,  die  sich  als  Initiatoren  einer  neuen  Epoche  verstanden,  erwarten 
vom  Menschen,  dafi  er  dank  seiner  schopferischen  Krafte  in  der  Lage  ist, 
sich  gegen  2Jle  Widerstande  durchzusetzen  und  sich  im  "regnum  hominis"  zu 
verwirklichen.  Daher  feierte  Giannozzo  Manetti  die  Kultur  als  Denkmal  der 
Menschenwiirde : 

(Ingenium  hominis)  tale  est,  ut  cuncta  queque  post  primam  illam  novam 
ac  rudem  mundi  creationem  ex  singulari  quodam  et  precipuo  humane 
mentis  acumine  a  nobis  adinventa  ac  confecta  et  absoluta  fuisse  videan- 
tur.  Nostra  namque,  hoc  est  humana,  sunt,  quoniam  ab  hominibus  ef- 

fecta,  quod  cernuntur.  .  .  .  Nostre  sunt  picture  et  sculpture,  nostre  sunt 

22 
artes,  nostre  .  .  .  scientie. 

Nachdem  Manetti  die  diese  Leistungen  bewirkenden  korperlichen  und 
geistig-seelischen  Vorziige  des  Menschen  ausfiihrlich  erortert  hat,  widerlegt 
er  im  einzelnen  die  Argumente,  welche  antike,  biblische  und  christliche  Auto- 
ren,  insbesondere  Papst  Innozenz  III.  in  seinem  Traktat  De  contemptu  mundi, 
angefiihrt  haben,  um  die  "miseria  vitae  humanae"  zu  beweisen.  Zuerst  die  zahl- 
reichen  Mangel  des  Korpers:  seine  geringe  Widerstandskraft  gegen  Hitze  und 
Kalte,  gegen  Ermiidung,  Hunger  und  Durst,  seine  schwachliche  Konstitu- 
tion,  die  zahlreichen  Krankheiten,  die  seine  Gesundheit  standig  in  Frage  stel- 
len;  sodann  die  vielfaltigen  Storungen,  "perturbationes,"  die  den  Frieden  der 
Seele  gefahrden:  Affekte  und  Leidenschaften,  den  Krankheiten  des  Korpers 
analoge  Erkrankungen  des  Gemiits,  die  den  Menschen  zur  Verzweiflung 
treiben.  Diese  negativen  Elemente  charakterisieren  die  "conditio  humana": 
"hominem  fragilem,  caducum,  et  ignobilem,  et  multis  ac  pene  infmitis  mor- 
borum  et  perturbationum  generibus  subiectum  .  .  .  paulo  diligentius  et  accu- 
ratius  considerantibus  plane  et  aperte  apparebit."^^  Daher  ist  der  Mensch,  wie 
schon  Plinius  wufite,  das  ungliicklichste  aller  Geschopfe.^'*  Es  ware  fiir  ihn 
besser,  iiberhaupt  nicht  geboren  zu  werden.  Den  weisen  Salomon  ekelte  das 
Leben  an:  "Me,  quodam  loco  inquit,  tedet  vite  mee  cum  videam  universa  mala 
que  sub  sole  fiunt,"^^  und  Hiob  klagte:  "homo  natus  de  muliere,  brevi  vivens 
tempore,  repletus  multis  miseriis,  .  .  .  et  fugit  velut  umbra  et  numquam  in 
eodem  statu  permanet."^^ 

Aber  Manetti  halt  alle  Argumente,  die  fiir  die  "miseria  hominis"  ins  Feld 
gefiihrt  werden,  nicht  fiir  schliissig,  vielmehr  fiir  frivol  und  eitel,  da  sie  das 
Wesen  des  Menschen  verfalschen.  Zug  um  Zug  sucht  er  das  iiberlieferte  nega- 
tive Menschenbild  zu  widerlegen.  Nur  weil  die  Menschen  der  Natur  gegenii- 
ber  undankbar  sind,  stets  zum  Jammern  geneigt  und  iiberempfmdlich,  wollen 
sie  nicht  anerkennen,  dafi  im  taglichen  Leben  das  Wohlbehagen  gegeniiber 
dem  Mifivergniigen  bei  weitem  iiberwiegt: 

si  homines  quos  fert  vita  communis  pluribus  inter  vivendum  volupta- 


AUGUST  BUCK  587 

tibus  et  delectationibus  potirentur  quam  molestiis  et  angoribus  crucia- 
rentur,  potius  gaudere  et  consolari  quam  conqueri  et  lamentari  debe- 
rent.^^ 

Da  sich  Manettiwohl  bewufit  war,  dafi  diese  und  ahnliche  Gegenargumente 
fiir  einen  am  Leben  leidenden  Menschen  wenig  beweiskraftig  waren,  vertro- 
stet  er  am  Schlufi  den  Leser  mit  der  Hoffnung  auf  die  Auferstehung,  nach  der 
er  in  einem  makellosen  Korper  sich  ewiger  Gesundheit  erfreuen,  in  unvergan- 
glicher  Schonheit  nicht  2iltern  und  keine  Trauer  kennen  wird.  Ob  Manetti 
"sub  specie  aeternitatis"  besser  zu  iiberzeugen  vermochte,  sei  dahingestellt, 
diirfte  auch  fiir  die  von  ihm  mit  dem  Traktat  verfolgte  Absicht  von  sekun- 
darer  Bedeutung  sein;  denn  es  ging  ihm  um  die  Apologie  der  "dignitas  ho- 
minis,"  der  die  "miseria  hominis"  letzten  Endes  nur  als  wirkungsvoller  Kontrast 
diente. 

Manettis  Glaube  an  den  absoluten  Primat  der  "dignitas"  gegeniiber  der  "mi- 
seria hominis"  verdeckte  das  im  Humanismus  von  Anfang  an  lebendige  Be- 
wufitsein  fur  die  existentielle  Unsicherheit  des  Menschen,  gesehen  nicht  in 
seiner  idealen  Uberhohung,  sodern  in  der  Begrenztheit  seines  Soseins,  also 
aus  der  Perspektive  der  MoraHstik.  Dabei  erhalten  die  iiberUeferten  Argu- 
mente  fiir  die  "miseria  hominis"  im  Kontext  der  Beobachtung  des  eigenen  Ich 
und  der  Umwelt  einen  neuen  Stellenwert.  Die  Beschreibung  des  Menschen 
in  der  Miihsal  seines  taghchen  Daseins,  ein  wesentHcher  Beitrag  der  itaUe- 
nischen  MoraHstik,  soil  nunmehr  aus  der  Sicht  dreier  reprasentativer  Hu- 
manisten  dargestellt  werden  und  zwar  an  Hand  ausgewahlter  Dialoge  von 
Francesco  Petrarca,  Poggio  Bracciolini  und  Leo  Battista  Alberti. 

Auch  Petrarcas  Deutung  des  Menschen  stand  im  Zeichen  des  Begriffspaars 
"dignitas  et  miseria  hominis."  Dem  Thema  der  Wesenswiirde  hat  er  ein  be- 
sonders  ausfiihrliches  Kapitel  in  den  Dialogen  De  remediis  utriusque  fortune  ge- 
widmet.^^  Der  gottesebenbildliche  Mensch  ist  dank  seiner  Intelligenz  den 
Tieren  weit  iiberlegen,  ihm  dient  alles  auf  Erden.  Seine  unsterbliche  Seele  si- 
chert  ihm  ein  Leben  iiber  den  leiblichen  Tod  hinaus,  mit  dem  alle  iibrigen 
Kreaturen  ins  Nichts  zuriicksinken.  Gegeniiber  dieser  Sonderstellung  des 
Menschen  als  des  grofiten  Wunders  der  Schopfung  erscheinen  die  Widrig- 
keiten  im  menschlichen  Leben  dem  Weisen  geringfiigig,  da  er  sie  mittels  seiner 
Vernunft  und  seiner  Tugend  zu  meistern  vermag  und  so  alle  Storungen  seines 
Seelenfriedens  abwehren  kann. 

Es  hat  den  Anschein,  als  ob  Petrarca  prinzipiell  den  gleichen  Standpunkt 
einnimmt  wie  spater  Manetti.  Aber  die  realistische  Analyse  seines  eigenen  Er- 
lebens,  wie  er  sie  in  seiner  fiktiven  Beichte  vor  dem  Kirchenvater  Augustin 
vortragt,  lafit  ihn  trotz  seines  ausgesprochenen  Selbstbewufiteins  als  Huma- 
nist und  Dichter  die  positive  Einschatzung  des  Menschen  und  seiner  Moglich- 
keiten  in  Frage  stellen.  Obgleich  er  sich  auf  eigene  Erfahrungen  stiitzt,  gelten 
diese  weithin  als  paradigmatisch  fiir  die  "conditio  humana"  schlechthin,  deren 


588       MORALISTISCHE  LITERATUR   DES  ITALIENISCHEN   RENAISSANCE-HUMANISMUS 

Unzulanglichkeiten  er  mit  einer  erst  wieder  durch  Montaigne  erreichten  psy- 
chologischen  Einfiihlungsgabe  geschildert  hat.  Indem  Petrarca,  allerdings  ohne 
es  offen  einzugestehen  wie  Montaigne,  nicht  an  die  Heilung  der  Schwachen 
der  "conditio  humana"  glaubt  und  auf  die  Selbstkorrektur  verzichtet,  macht 
er  den  Weg  frei,  "die  eigene  Wirklichkeit  so  umfangreich  wie  moglich  zu 
schildern"^^  und  wird  so  zum  Begriinder  der  italienischen  und  Ahnherrn  der 
europaischen  Moralistik. 

Petrarcas  Selbstanalyse  im  Secretum  liegt  die  Konzeption  des  Lebens  als  einer 
Krankheit  zugrunde,  wie  auch  die  wiederholte  Verwendung  der  Begriffe  "mor- 
bus" und  "pestis"  nebst  sinnverwandter  Bezeichnungen  wie  "malum,"  "aegri- 
tudo"  und  "vulnus"  bezeugt.  Zum  ersten  Mai  gewinnt  hier  das  Leiden 
Eigenbedeutung  als  Grunderfahrung  des  Ausgeliefertseins  an  die  Verganglich- 
keit.  Petrarca  versteht  sich  als  Kranker  und  seinen  Beichtvater  Augustin  als 
den  Arzt,  von  dem  er  wirksame  Remedia  gegen  seine  Leiden  erwartet.  Als 
er  einige  Beispiele  fur  das  den  Menschen  standig  bedrohende  Unheil 
aufzahlt  — Armut,  Schmerz,  Entehrung,  Krankheit  und  Tod  — entgegnet  ihm 
Augustin,  die  genannten  Ubel  konnten  niemanden  wirklich  ungliicklich 
machen,  derin  die  Philosophen,  Cicero  an  ihrer  Spitze,  lehrten,  wahres  Ungliick 
bestehe  nur  im  Verlust  der  "virtus,"  also  im  "vitium."  Obwohl  Petrarca  seinen 
Beichtvater  (der  nicht  mit  dem  historischen  Augustin  identisch  ist)  darauf 
hinweist,  dafi  er  hier  wie  die  Stoiker  spricht,  deren  Lehre  von  der  Lebenspraxis 
weit  entfernt  ist,  "veritati  propinquiora  quam  usui,"^^  versucht  Augustin  sein 
Beichtkind  davon  zu  iiberzeugen,  dafi  es  mit  der  Uberwindung  seiner  Laster, 
christlich  gesprochen  seiner  Siinden,  auch  von  seinen  existentiellen  Angsten 
befreit  werden  wiirde. 

Aus  dieser  Deutung  der  "miseria"  entwickelt  Augustin  die  Therapie  fiir  Pe- 
trarcas Leiden.  An  Hand  der  sieben  "peccata  capitalia,"  verstanden  weniger 
als  Siinden  denn  als  Krankheiten  der  Seele,  erortern  die  Gesprachspartner, 
inwieweit  Petrarca  jeweils  einer  Siinde  verhaftet  ist  und  imstande,  sich  von 
ihr  zu  befreien.  Diese  Befreiung  bewirkt  die  Vernunft.  Sie  heilt  den  Irrtum, 
auf  dem  die  Siinde  beruht;  auch  eine  These,  die  Petrarcas  Augustin  der  stoi- 
schen  Ethik  entlehnt.  Siinden  sind  Fehlleistungen,  die  mangelndem  Wissen 
entspringen,  und  daher  durch  die  Vernunft  korrigiert  werden  konnen,  sofern 
deren  Urteilskraft  nicht  durch  das  vierkopfige  Ungeheuer  der  Affekte  "gau- 
dium,"  "spes,"  "dolor,"  und  "metus"  getriibt  wird.  Deren  schadlichen  Einflufi 
kann  nur  die  Apathia,  die  Unterdriickung  der  Leidenschaften,  ausschalten, 
womit  Augustin  wiederum  auf  die  Stoa  rekurriert. 

Verspricht  sich  Petrarca  von  der  Anwendung  dieser  stoischen  Therapie,  d.h. 
der  Verteidigung  gegen  die  den  Seelenfrieden  storenden  Ubel  in  der  "festen 
Burg''  der  Vernunft,  die  Heilung  seiner  leidenden  Seele?  Ihr  schwerstes  Leiden 
ist  die  "acedia,"  die  "sich  in  der  breiten  Bedeutung  der  negativen  Haltung  zur 
Welt  als  eine  Art  Leitfaden  durch  das  ganze  Werk  zieht."^^  Noch  weniger  als 
die  iibrigen  "peccata  capitalia"  hat  sie  ihren  christlichen  Siindencharakter  be- 


AUGUST  BUCK  589 

wahrt  und  prasentiert  sich  als  Krankheit,  "funesta  quedam  pestis  animi,  quam 
accidiam  moderni^  veteres  egritudinem  dixerunt'V^  eine  keineswegs  erschop- 
fende  Definition  des  in  der  Uberlieferung  seit  der  friihchrisdichen  Literatur 
schillernden  Begriffs,^^  den  Petrarca  durch  weitere  Synonyma  umschreibt; 
u.a.  —  im  Einklang  mit  Thomas  von  Aquin  — durch  "tristitia,"^'^  ferner  durch 
"anxietas,"  "tedium,"  "fastidium,"  "odium  atque  contemptus  humanae  condi- 
tionis."^^ 

Die  Vielzahl  der  Umschreibungen  zeigt,  wie  schwer  es  Petrarca  fallt,  die 
Krankheit  genau  zu  bestimmen,  unter  der  er  im  Gegensatz  zu  anderen  Lei- 
denschaften,  die  ihn  dann  und  wann  befallen,  Tag  und  Nacht  leidet  und  den- 
noch  seinen  Schmerz  in  einer  seltsamen  Wollust,  "atra  voluptas,"  geniefit,  so 
dafi  es  ihm  schwer  fallt,  sich  von  ihm  loszureifien.  Ebenso  wenig  eindeutig 
wie  der  Charakter  der  Krankheit  ist  ihre  Ursache:  Sie  liegt  in  der  Summe  des 
Ungliicks,  das  die  Petrarca  ungiinstig  gesonnene  Fortuna  ihm  zufiigt.  Ihrem 
Ansturm  fiihlt  er  sich  nicht  gewachsen,  wenn  sie  ihm  sein  gegenwartiges  Elend 
vor  Augen  halt  und  diese  Schreckensvision  verstarkt  durch  die  Erinnerung 
an  die  vergangenen  Kiimmernisse  und  die  Frucht  vor  den  kiinftigen.  Mit  der 
Berufung  auf  die  unberechenbare  Fortuna,  die  nicht  mehr  wie  bei  Dante  die 
Dienerin  der  Vorsehung  ist,  erscheint  die  "acedia"  als  ein  psychologisches 
Phanomen,  das  sich  der  rationalen  Deutung  entzieht.  Sie  ist  keine  Siinde  mehr 
wie  im  Katalog  der  "peccata  capitalia,"  sondern  ein  krankhafter  Seelenzustand 
eines  Menschen,  der  an  der  Welt  leidet. 

Gegeniiber  der  "acedia"  versagen  die  guten  Ratschlage  der  Moralphilo- 
sophen.  Auf  Augustins  Frage  erklart  Petrarca,  er  habe  zwar  Seneca  und  Ci- 
cero fleifiig  gelesen,  aber  nach  beendeter  Lektiire  sei  ihre  Wirkung 
geschwunden:  "libro  autem  e  manibus  elapso,  assensio  simul  omnis  inter- 
cidit"^^;  eine  Aussage,  die  am  Beginn  des  Humanismus  bereits  einen  Zweifel 
am  absoluten  sittigenden  Wert  der  "studia  humanitatis"  und  damit  am  Prin- 
zip  der  humanistischen  Bildung  impliziert.  Der  ideale  Anspruch  an  den  Mens- 
chen wird  durch  dessen  Affektenabhangigkeit  und  seine  Fremdbestimmung 
durch  die  Umwelt,  begriffen  als  die  zinonyme  Fortuna,  in  Frage  gestellt.  Schon 
bei  Petrarca  meldet  sich  jene  "Autonomieskepsis,"  die  nach  Jiirgen  von  Stack- 
elberg  im  Zentrum  der  Moralistik  steht.^'' 

Die  in  seiner  Selbstanalyse  begonnene  Auseinandersetzung  mit  der  "adversa 
fortuna"  hat  Petrarca  spater  in  der  wichtigsten  seiner  moralphilosophischen 
Schriften,  den  Remedia  utriusque  fortune  fortgesetzt  und  dabei  die  therapeutische 
Methode  des  Secretum  konsequent  ausgebaut.^^  Indem  er  die  Auseinanderset- 
zung mit  der  Fortuna  entpersonlicht,  lafit  er  den  Kampf  gegen  sie  durch  die 
Virtus  austragen.  Siegerin  wird  die  Fortuna,  deren  Macht  unablassig  im  Lauf 
der  Geschichte  wachst.  Der  Widerstand  der  Virtus  gegen  die  Affekte  bleibt 
vergeblich;  denn  eine  moralphilosophische  Therapie,  der  im  individuellen  Be- 
reich  nur  geringe  Chancen  eingeraumt  werden,  muft  auf  kollektiver  Ebene 
gegen  die  Krankheit  einer  Zeit  versagen,  in  welcher  das  Bose  standig  zunimmt. 


590       MORALISTISCHE  LITERATUR   DES  ITALIENISCHEN   RENAISSANCE-HUMANISMUS 

In  einem  merkwiirdigen  Zwiespalt  seiner  geistigen  Personlichkeit  glaubte  Pe- 
trarca  einerseits,  an  der  Schwelle  eines  neuen  besseren  Zeitalters  zu  stehen,^^ 
anderseits  in  einer  Welt  zu  leben,  deren  Ende  unmittelbar  bevorstand.  Dieses 
Endzeitbewufitsein  nahrte  einen  Pessimismus,  der  keine  Hoffnung  auf  eine 
Besserung  der  Menschheit  gestattete. 

Der  bei  Petrarca  zu  beobachtende  unterschwellige  Pessimismus  ist  ein  As- 
pekt  des  Humanismus,  welcher,  verdeckt  durch  die  einseitige  Vorstellung  einer 
nur  optimistisch  gesonnenen  Renaissance,  haufig  iibersehen  wird.  Aber  die 
menschenkundliche  Literatur  nach  Petrarca  beweist,  dafi  viele  Humanisten 
ihre  Augen  nicht  vor  den  negativen  Ziigen  des  Menschen  verschlossen  und 
die  standige  Gefahrdung  der  menschlichen  Existenz  durch  die  feindliche  Re- 
alitat  als  Kampf  gegen  die  Fortuna  mit  wechselvollem  Ausgang  begriffen  haben. 
Auch  als  man  sich  im  Quattrocento  nicht  mehr  wie  seinerzeit  Petrarca  in  einer 
absterbenden  Welt  wahnte,  bleibt  die  "miseria  hominis"  als  eine  existentielle 
Erfahrung  stets  prasent.  Das  beweisen  die  moralistischen  Beitrage  der  beiden 
Humanisten,  denen  wir  uns  nunmehr  zuwenden:  Poggio  Bracciolini  und  Leon 
Battista  Alberti. 

Poggio  Bracciolini,  einer  der  fruchtbarsten  Dialog- Autoren  unter  den  ita- 
lienischen  Humanisten,  fmgiert,  angeregt  durch  Petrarcas  De  remediis  utriusque 
fortune,  ein  Streitgesprach  zwischen  Cosimo  de'Medici  und  dem  Humanisten 
Matteo  Palmieri  De  miseria  humanae  conditionis,  in  welchem  nach  dem  Prinzip 
"in  utramque  partem  disserere"  Palmieri  das  ausweglose  Elend  des  Menschen 
schildert.  Aus  der  Geschichte  des  Altertums  und  der  Gegenwart  werden  Bei- 
spiele  fiir  koUektives  Ungliick  zitiert,  Katastrophen  aller  Art  mit  verheerenden 
Auswirkungen  auf  die  Betroffenen.  Vor  diesem  diisteren  Hintergrund  erfolgt 
die  detaillierte  Beschreibung  der  menschlichen  Schwachen.  Zu  ihnen  zahlen 
auch  die  Laster  der  Seele,  die  zahlreicher  sind  als  die  korperlichen  Gebrechen. 

Alle  diese  Ubel  zu  iiberwinden,  ist,  abgesehen  von  einigen  wenigen  Aus- 
nahmegeschopfen,  die  Vernunft  des  gewohnlichen  Menschen  nicht  in  der 
Lange.  Die  bereits  Petrarca  vergeblich  empfohlene  stoische  Therapie,  zu  der 
Cosimo  rat,  wird  auch  von  Poggio  "ad  absurdum"  gefiihrt:  "Non  etiam  nobis 
sapiens  stoicus  queritur,  qui  in  tauro  Phalaridis  futurus  sit  beatus,  sed  de  com- 
muni  hominum  natura  deque  publica  totius  humani  generis  miseria  dispu- 
tamus."^^  Das  Interesse  des  Menschenpriifers  gilt  der  "conditio  humana" 
schlechthin:  Er  beobachtet  und  registriert  ihre  anlagebedingten  Mangel  und 
akzeptiert  sie  als  unvermeidlich.  Selbst  Cosimo  muft  zugestehen,  dafi  es  toricht 
ist,  sich  iiber  Fehler  des  Menschen  zu  beklagen,  die  nicht  zu  korrigieren  sind: 
"Quid  enim  stultius  aut  viro  sapiente  indignius  quam  flere  id  quod  corrigere 
nequeat?"*^ 

Poggios  Realitatssinn,  seine  "vorturteilsfreie  Betrachtung  des  Lebens*^^  sind 
die  Voraussetzungen  dafur,  der  Abhangigkeit  des  Menschen  von  seinen  Trie- 
ben,  die  iiblicherweise  als  ein  Merkmal  der  "miseria  hominis"  beklagt  wird, 
in  einem  Fall  eine  positive  Deutung  zu  geben.  Es  ist  der  Versuch  einer  Recht- 


AUGUST  BUCK  59I 

fertigung  der  Habsucht  durch  einen  der  Gesprachspartner  des  Dialogs  De  ava- 
ritia,  der  wohl  gerade  deshalb  eine  besondere  Beachtung  in  der  Forschung  der 
letzten  Jahrzehnte  gefunden  hat.""^^  Der  von  dem  mit  Poggio  befreudeten 
papstlichen  Sekretar  Antonio  Loschi,  dem  Verteidiger  der  Habsucht,  verkiin- 
dete  Grundsatz  "vita  mortalium  non  est  exigenda  nobis  ad  statheram  philo- 
sophiae"**  kennzeichnet  Poggios  allgemeine  Abneigung  gegen  die  "praecepta," 
mit  denen  die  Moralphilosophie  das  Leben  regeln  will;  eine  Einstellung,  die 
Riccardo  Fubini  kiirzlich  treffend  als  "antifilosofia  morale  di  Poggio"  bezeich- 
net  hat.'^^  Diese  Einstellung  ermoglicht  eine  von  moralischen  Skrupeln  freie 
Betrachtung  der  Habsucht  auf  empirischer  Basis. 

Die  Erfahrung  lehrt,  dafi  die  "avaritia,"  verstanden  als  Streben  nach  Ge- 
winn,  den  Menschen  dazu  antreibt,  sich  um  des  eigenen  Vorteils  willen  zu 
betatigen.  "Quicquid  tractamus,  operamur,  agimus,  eo  spectat,  ut  quam  mul- 
tum  commodi  ex  eo  capiamus."*^  Soweit  die  "avaritia"  dabei  durch  den  Selbst- 
erhaltungstrieb  motiviert  wird,  erscheint  sie  nicht  tadelnswert.  Denn:  "Quae 
autem  a  natura  insunt  nobis,  minime  sunt  vituperanda."*^  Der  erworbene 
Gewinn  bleibt  nicht  dem  personlichen  Nutzen  vorbehalten,  sondern  kommt 
auch  der  Allgemeinheit  zugute.  Wer  iiber  kein  Vermogen  verfiigt,  kann  weder 
das  christliche  Gebot  der  Barmherzigkeit  erfiillen  noch  zu  den  Ausgaben  der 
Respublica  beisteuern.  Nur  wenn  das  Gewinnstreben  ausschliefilich  egoisti- 
schen  Zwecken  dient,  ist  es  als  schadlich  zu  verurteilen.  Das  Gemeinwohl  ist 
das  Kriterium,  nach  dem  die  "avaritia"  bewertet  wird. 

Es  geht  nicht  um  eine  Auseinandersetzung  mit  dem  "peccatum  capitale"  des 
christlichen  Siindenkatalogs,  vielmehr  um  die  Phanomenologie  eines  Na- 
turtriebes,  dessen  Entfaltung  Poggio  in  der  okonomischen  Tatigkeit  des  zeit- 
genossischen  Biirgertums  beobachtete.  Die  Betonung  des  Geldes,  das 
anzuhaufen  alle  bemiiht  sind,  ist  ein  nicht  zu  iibersehender  Hinweis  auf  den 
Friihkapitalismus  in  den  italienischen  Stadten.  In  seinen  Rahmen  wird  der 
faktische  Mensch  gestellt  und  sein  Verhalten  an2ilysiert.  Wiederum  n2ihm  Pog- 
gio die  Gelegenheit  wahr,  nach  dem  Prinzip  "in  utramque  partem  disserere" 
eine  Erorterung  vorzutragen,  die  keineswegs  —  wie  man  behauptet  hat  — als 
"jeu  d'esprit"  abqualifiziert  werden  darf,*^  sondern  einen  weiteren  Beitrag  zur 
Menschenkunde  darstellt,  unabhangig  von  der  hier  nicht  zu  diskutierenden 
Frage,  inwieweit  die  positive  Bewertung  des  menschlichen  Gewinnstrebens  Pog- 
gios personlicher  Meinung  entsprach  oder  nicht. 

Ebenso  illusionslos,  wie  Poggio  den  Trieb  nach  Besitz  betrachtet,  steht  er 
dem  Machttrieb  gegeniiber.  In  einem  Streitgesprach  iiber  den  Vorrang  von 
Medizin  und  Jurisprudenz,  der  zweiten  der  drei  Dissectationes  convivales,  bestrei- 
tet  der  Arzt  Niccolo  da  Foligno  den  Nutzen  der  Gesetze  fiir  die  Entwicklung 
der  Menschheit  und  behauptet:  "Quippe  qui  videamus  res  publicas  per  vim 
ad  summum  imperium  pervenisse  et  regna  non  legibus  sed  viribus  et  manu 
que  sunt  inimica  legibus  comparata."^^  Den  Beweis  dafiir  liefert  die  Ge- 
schichte.  Von  den  Medern  und  Persern  des  Altertums  bis  zu  den  Florentinern 


592       MORALISTISCHE  LITERATUR   DES  ITALIENISCHEN  RENAISSANCE-HUMANISMUS 

und  Venezianern  der  Gegenwart  sind  alle  machtigen  Reiche  auf  Raub  und 
Gewalt  begriindet  worden.  "Omnia  enim  preclara  et  memoratu  digna  ab  in- 
iuria  atque  iniustitia  contemptis  sunt  legibus  profecta."^^ 

Wenn  Staaten  einen  Krieg  beginnen,  fragen  sie  nicht  danach,  ob  er  vom 
Standpunkt  des  Rechts  aus  erlaubt  ist,  sondern  richten  sich  lediglich  nur  nach 
dem,  was  dem  Staat  niitzt  und  seine  Macht  vergrofiert;  "utilitas  et  augmen- 
tum  .  .  .  reipublicae"  bestimmen  allein  das  politische  Handeln.^^  Eine  realpo- 
litische  Betrachtung,  welche  die  Politik  von  der  Moral  trennt  und  Machiavelli 
vorwegnimmt.  Obgleich  es  natiirlich  Poggio  fern  lag,  aus  dieser  Trennung 
wie  spater  Machiavelli  eine  Technik  des  politischen  Handelns  abzuleiten,  teilt 
er  iedoch  wie  auch  andere  Moralisten  mit  Machiavelli  das  Interesse  an  der 
Erfahrung  der  Realitat,  d.h.  an  Machiavellis  "verita  effettuale."^^ 

Wohl  kaum  ein  anderer  Humanist  hat  der  Erfahrungswirklichkeit  so  nahe 
gestanden  wie  Leon  Battista  Alberti.  Dank  seiner  schon  von  Jacob  Burckhardt 
bewunderten  Allseitigkeit  der  Begabungen  interessierte  ihn  die  ganze  Welt  in 
der  Fiille  ihrer  Erscheinungen.  Die  dabei  an  Menschen  und  Dingen  gemach- 
ten  Erfahrungen  haben  sich  auch  in  seinen  humanistischen  Schriften  nieder- 
geschlagen.  Erst  neuerdings  hat  man  in  ihnen  eine  ambivalente  Haltung 
gegeniiber  der  Lebenswirklichkeit  entdeckt:  einerseits  ein  starkes  Engage- 
ment fur  die  soziale  Verantwortung  des  einzelnen  gegeniiber  der  Gesellschaft, 
anderseits  eine  pessimistische  Resignation  in  Anbetracht  der  Nutzlosigkeit  des 
Kampfes  gegen  das  durch  menschliche  Handlungen  nicht  zu  beeinflussende 
Fatum.  So  konnte  Eugenio  Garin,  der  Altmeister  der  italienischen  Huma- 
nismusforschung,  konstatieren:  "La  visione  disincantata  di  un'umanita  infe- 
lice  e  malvagia  non  abbandonera  mai  1' Alberti,  e  .  .  .  rimarra  costante,  nello 
sfondo,  un  pessimismo  cupo." 

Wie  bei  Petrarca  und  Poggio  ist  die  "miseria  hominis"  ein  wesentlicher  An- 
trieb  zu  der  beschreibenden  Analyse  der  psychologischen  Wirklichkeit,  ver- 
flochten  mit  dem  normativ  geformten  Menschenbild  der  Moralphilosophie. 
In  der  Nachfolge  Lukians  erscheint  in  ironischer  Verfremdung  das  mensch- 
liche Leben  so  wohl  in  den  Intercenales  als  auch  im  Momus;  beide  Werke  sind 
nach  Garins  Urteil  "il  continuo  commento  ironico  al  dramma  assurdo  della 
vita."^'^  Das  Leben  ist  eine  Kette  von  Angsten  und  Enttauschungen: 

qui  inter  mortales  degit,  ut  speret  aut  metuat,  audeat  aut  reformidet, 
aut  moereat,  aut  exultet,  aut  irascatur,  aut  frigescat  et  langueat,  rursus 
invideat,  aut  contemnat,  aut  oderit,  .  .  .  denique  .  .  .  intelliges  a  mor- 
t2ilibus  ferme  nihil  fieri  quod  ipsum  non  frustra  et  inepte  factum  iudi- 
ces." 

Angesichts  der  Sinnlosigkeit  des  Lebens  erscheint  sogar  der  Tod  erstrebens- 
wert:  "Quid  igitur  praestabilius  morte,  quid  appetendum  magis,  quid  aeque 
omnibus  optimis  rebus  longe  anteponendum  est?"^^ 

Zweifellos  ist  haufig  der  Mensch  selbst  an  seinem  Ungliick  schuld.  "Pestis 


AUGUST  BUCK  593 

est  homo  homini,"^^  klagt  Jupiter  und  wirft  den  Menschen  vor,  sie  seien  un- 
dankbar,  immer  auf  das  Neue  aus,  "novarum  semper  cupidi  rerum,**  unzu- 
frieden  mit  der  eigenen  Situation  und  besessen  von  einer  ziigellosen 
Unmafiigkeit;^^  eine  Charakterisierung,  die  wiederum  an  Machiavelli  erin- 
nert:  "delli  uomini  si  puo  dire  questo  generalmente:  che  sieno  ingrati,  vol- 
ubili,  .  .  .  fuggitori  de'pericoli,  cupidi  di  guadagno."^^  Wie  Machiavelli  halt 
Albertis  Jupiter  die  Menschen  fiir  unverbesserlich  verderbt  und  beschliefit 
daher  eine  neue  Welt  zu  schaffen,  in  der  das  menschliche  Leben  von  Grund 
auf  reformiert  werden  wird:  "novam  vivendi  rationem  adinveniemus."^^ 

Wenn  das  negative  Menschenbild,  das  Alberti  in  den  Intercenales  und  im 
Momus  entwirft,  in  den  spater  verfafiten  italienischen  Dialogen  Theogenius  und 
Profugiorum  ab  aerumnia  libri  III  wiederkehrt  und  weiter  ausgefiihrt  wird,  voU- 
zieht  sich  hier  innerhalb  von  Albertis  literarischem  Schaffen  der  Ubergang 
der  Moralistik  aus  dem  Latein  in  die  Volkssprache.  Als  der  bedeutendste 
Reprasentant  des  italienischen  Vulgarhumanismus,  der  das  legitime  Bildungs- 
bediirfnis  der  des  Lateins  unkundigen  Laien  befriedigen  will,  iibertragt  Al- 
berti eine  typische  Fragestellung  der  humanistischen  Anthropologie  in  die 
Nationalliteratur,  die  hier  wie  auch  in  anderen  Fallen  sich  nahtlos  an  die  neu- 
lateinische  Literatur  anschliefit;  ein  weiterer  Beweis  fur  die  innere  Einheit  der 
beiden  literarischen  Bereiche  in  der  Renaissance. 

Ein  kurzer  Blick  auf  die  beiden  genannten  italienischen  Dialoge  mag  die 
thematische  Kontinuitat  bestatigen:  Das  rastlose  Streben  nach  dem  Neuen, 
vielfach  als  ein  Vorzug  des  Menschengeistes  gefeiert,  erscheint  Alberti  auch 
im  Theogenius  als  ein  verderblicher  Hang  des  Menschen,  der  ihn  die  Begrenzt- 
heit  seiner  Moglichkeiten  vergessen  lafit.  Die  Warnung,  welche  die  Schatten 
in  dem  zu  den  Intercenales  gehorenden  Dizdog  Fatum  et  Fortuna  aussprechen,  "De- 
sine,  homo,  occulta  investigare  longius  quam  mortalibus  liceat,"^^  kehrt  hier 
wieder:  "Che  stoltezza  de'mortali  che  vogliamo  sapere  e  quando  e  come  e  per 
qual  consiglio  e  a  che  fme  sia  ogni  istituo  e  opera  di  Dio."^^  Dem  unter  den 
Schwachen  seiner  Veranlagung  und  an  den  Widrigkeiten  des  Daseins  leidenden 
Menschen  werden  in  den  Profugiorum  ab  aerumnia  libri  weder  der  Appell  an  die 
Vernunft  noch  die  Beherrschung  des  Willens  als  Therapie  gegen  seine  "mi- 
seria"  empfohlen,  vielmehr  praktische  Verhaltensregeln  gegeben,  die  seinen 
Seelenfrieden  so  weit  wie  moglich  sichern  sollen. 

Die  in  der  Moralistik  von  vornherein  angelegte  Tendenz,  aufgrund  der  Ein- 
sicht  in  die  Spannung  zwischen  moralphilosophischem  Anspruch  und  prak- 
tischer  Lebenserfahrung  die  Antike  als  Bildungsgrundlage  zwar  beizubehalten, 
aber  ihre  Autoritat  zu  relativieren,  eine  Tendenz,  die  sich  bei  Alberti  verstarkt, 
wird  bei  der  Weiterentwicklung  der  italienischen  Moralistik  in  Francesco  Guic- 
ciardinis  Ricordi  ganz  offenkundig.  Indem  der  Autor  Theorie  und  Praxis 
grundsatzlich  trennt  und  damit  die  Giiltigkeit  allgemeiner  Regeln  bestreitet, 
konzentriert  sich  seine  morzilistische  Beobachtung  auf  das  Individuelle  und  Par- 
tikulare.  Aus  dieser  Erfahrung  leitet  er  die  Ratschlage  ab,  die  er  dem  Leser 


594       MORALISTISCHE  LITERATUR   DES  ITALIENISCHEN   RENAISSANCE-HUMANISMUS 

zur  Daseinsbewaltigung  an  die  Hand  gibt.  Eine  auffallige  Haufung  von  in 
der  spateren  Moralistik  wiederkehrenden  Themen  einerseits  und  anderseits 
die  von  Guicciardini  gewahlte  aphoristische  Ausdruckform  diirften  die  Ur- 
sache  dafiir  sein,  dafi  die  Ricordi,  "nach  allgemeiner  Auffassung,  die  erste  im 
engeren  Sinne  moralistische  Schrift"  darstellen.^^ 

Die  Verbindungslinien,  die  sich  von  Guicciardini  zu  franzosischen  Mo- 
ralisten,  etwa  zu  Montaigne  oder  La  Rochefoucauld,  ebenso  auch  nach  Spa- 
nien  zu  Gracian  und  Quevedo  ziehen  lassen,  bestatigen  den  hterarhistorischen 
Zusammenhang,  um  dessen  VerdeutUchung  wir  bemiiht  gewesen  sind:  die 
Entstehung  und  erste  Ausbildung  der  europaischen,  namentUch  der  roma- 
nischen  MoraHstik  im  Schofie  der  neulateinischen  Literatur  des  itahenischen 
Humanismus.  Durch  dessen  zukunftstrachtige  Beitrage  zur  MoraHstik  wird 
die  Behauptung  widerlegt,  "die  meisten  Trobleme'  der  Humanisten  (seien)  ele- 
gante Variationen  iiber  Gemeinplatze,  die  fiir  rhetorische  Ubungen  seit  der 
Antike  gebraucht  wurden;"^"^  vielmehr  erweist  sich  der  italienische  Humanis- 
mus als  ein  konstitutives  Glied  in  der  von  der  Antike  ausgehenden  literari- 
schen  Tradition  Europas:  Er  ist  die  Schule,  in  welcher  die  modernen 
europaischen  Literaturen  ihre  Miindigkeit  erreicht  haben. 


Anmerkungen 


1.  G.  W.  F.  Hegel,  Vorlesungen  iiber  die  Geschichte  der  Philosophie,  in:  Hegel,  WerkeXW, 
Berlin  1836,  252  f. 

2.  W.  Dilthey,  Auffassung  und  Analyse  des  Menschen  im  15.  und  16.  Jahrhundert,  in:  Dil- 
they,  Gesammelte  Schriften  II,  Leipzig  u.  Berlin  1914,  18. 

3.  H.  Friedrich,  Montaigne,  Bern  1949,  221. 

4.  J.  V.  Stackelberg,  Franzosische Moralistik  im  europaischen  Kontext,  Darmstadt  1982,  8. 

5.  "moraliste,"  in:  Micro  Robert,  Paris  1971,  684. 

6.  F.  Nietzsche,  Menschliches  II,  §  5. 

7.  F.  Schalk,  Einleitung,  in:  Franzosische Moralisten  ....  Verdeutscht  u.hg.v.  Schalk, 
Wiesbaden  1938;  Friedrich,  Montaigne  aaO.  u.  "Uberblick  iiber  den  Gang  der  itahe- 
nischen Literatur"  in:  Friedrich,  Romanische  Literaturen  II,  Frankfurt  a.M.  1972,  13-31. 

8.  F.  Schalk,  Moralisti  italiani  del  Rinascimento,  Wien  1940,  Abtlg.  f.  Kulturwissen- 
schaft  des  K.W.-I.  im  Palazzo  Zuccari,  Rom,  I.  Reihe,  Vortrage  H.23;  v.  Stackel- 
berg, Franzosische  Moralistik,  aaO.  38  ff. 

9.  J.  Burckhardt,  Die  Kultur  der  Renaissance  in  Italien,  Durchges.  v.  W.  Goetz,  Stutt- 
gart 1952,  123. 

10.  F.  Petrarca,  Seniles  XV,  1;  in:  Petrarca,  Opera,  Basileae  1554,  1046. 

11.  P.  O.  Kristeller,  "The  Moral  Thought  of  Renaissance  Humanism,"  in:  Chapters 
in  Western  Civilisation,  New  York  1961,  289-335;  auf  deutsch:  "Das  moralische  Denken 
des  Renaissance-Humanismus,"  in:  Kristeller,  Humanismus  und  Renaissance  II,  Miinchen 
1976,  30-84;  das  Zitat:  39. 

12.  "cognitio  morum  hominum  primo  in  genere,  post  iuxta  gentes,  et  reliqua  ut  con- 


AUGUST  BUCK  595 

suetudines,  demum  huius  proprie  vel  alterius"  (H.  Cardani,  De  vita  propria  XLIV,  in: 
Cardani  Opera  omnia,  Lugduni  1663,  Faksimile-Neudruck  .  .  .  mit  einer  Einleitung  v. 
A.  Buck,  Stuttgart-Bad  Cannstatt  1966,  I,  40). 

13.  "Acht  Inauguralreden  des  Veroneser  Guarino  und  seines  Sohnes  Battista,"  ed. 
K.  Mullner,  in:  Wiener  Studien  18,  1896,  289  f. 

14.  Petrarca,  Posteritati,  a  cura  di  P.  G.  Ricci,  in:  Petrarca,  Prose,  Milano/Napoli 
1955,  6. 

15.  Kristeller,  "Das  morsdische  Denken,"  aaO.  43. 

16.  V,  Gronbech,  Der  Hellenismus,  Lebensstimmung,   Weltmacht,  Gottingen  1953. 

17.  W.  Riiegg,  Cicero  und  der  Humanismus,  Formale  Untersuchungen  iiber  Petrarca  und 
Erasmus,  Zurich  1946,  39. 

18.  Petrarca,  Secretum,  Prohemium,  a  cura  di  E.  Carrara,  in:  Petrarca,  Prose,  aaO.  26. 

19.  Zur  formalen  Entwicklung  des  humanistischen  Dialogs  im  Quattrocento  vgl.  D. 
Marsh,  The  Quattrocento  Dialogus,  Classical  Tradition  and  Humanist  Innovation,  Cambridge, 
Mass.  and  London  1980. 

20.  L.  Bruni  Aretino,  Ad  Petrum  Paulum  Histrum  dialogus  I,  in:  Prosatori  latini  del  Quat- 
trocento, a  cura  di  E.  Garin,  Milano/Napoli  1952,  46,  48. 

21 .  A.  Buck,  "Die  Rangstellung  des  Menschen  in  der  Renaissance,"  in:  Archivf.  Kult.  - 
gesch.,  42,  1960,  61-75;  Ch.  Trinkaus,  In  Our  Image  and  Likeness,  Humanity  and  Divinity 
in  Italian  Humanist  Thought,  London  1970,  I,  171-293. 

22.  L  Manetti,  De  dignitate  et  excellentia  hominis  III,  ed.  E.  E.  Leonard,  Patavii  1975,  77. 

23.  Ibid.  IV,  106. 

24.  Plinius,  Nat.  hist.  VII,  1. 

25.  Manetti  IV,  aaO.  110;  Eccle.  II,  17. 

26.  Ibid.;  HiobXIV,  1-2. 

27.  Manetti  IV,  aaO.  115. 

28.  Von  der  "dignitas  hominis"  handelt  auch  einer  der  "Psalmi  penitentiales"  vgl. 
K.  Heitmann,  Fortuna  und  Virtus,  Eine  Studie  zu  Petrarcas  Lebensweisheit,  Koln/Graz  1958, 
209  ff. 

29.  Friedrich,  "Uberblick  iiber  den  Gang  der  italienischen  Literatur,"  aaO.  25. 

30.  Petrarca,  Secretum  I,  aaO.  34. 

31.  E.  Loos,  "Die  Hauptsiinde  der  'acedia'  in  Dantes  Commedia  und  in  Petrarcas  Se- 
cretum, Zum  Problem  der  italienischen  Renaissance,"  in:  Petrarca  1304-1374,  Beitrdge 
zu  Werk  und  Wirkung,  Hg.  v.  F.  Schalk,  Frankfurt  a.M.  1975,  177. 

32.  Petrarca,  Secretum  II,  aaO.  106. 

33.  Zur  Uberlieferungsgeschichte  von  "acedia"  vgl.  E.  Wenzel,  The  Sin  of  Sloth,  Acedia 
in  Medieval  Thought  and  Literature,  Chapel  Hill  1967. 

34.  Thomas  von  Aquin,  Summa  theol.  I,  qu.63,  2U't.2. 

35.  Loos,  aaO.  177. 

36.  Petrarca,  Secretum  II,  aaO.  122. 

37.  V.  Stackelberg,  Franzosische  Moralistik,  aaO.  27. 

38.  Heitmann,  Fortuna  und  Virtus,  aaO. 

39.  Petrarca,  Rerum  memorandarum  1.  I,  19,  4;  ed.  G.  Billanovich,  Firenze  1945,  19. 

40.  P.  Bracciolini,  De  miseria  humanae  conditionis  libri  duo,  in:  Bracciolini,  Opera,  Ar- 
gentorati  1513,  f.  36v;  Cod.  Urb.  lat.  224,  136rv. 

41.  Ibid.  f.  34v;  Cod.  Urb.  132v-133r. 

42.  H.  M.  Goldbrunner,  "Poggios  Dialog  iiber  die  Habsucht,  Bemerkungen  zu  einer 
neuen  Untersuchung,"  in:  Quellen  und Forschungen  aus  italienischen  Archiven  und Bibliotheken 
59,  1979,  446. 

43.  E.  Garin,  L'umanestmo  italiano,  Ban  1964,  54  ff.;  J.  W.  Oppel,  "Poggio,  San  Ber- 


596         MORALISTICHE  LITERATUR  DES  ITALIENISCHEN  RENAISSANCE-HUMANISMUS 

nardino  of  Siena  and  the  Dialogue  On  Avarice,"  in:  Renaissance  Quarterly  30,  1977,  564-87; 
E.  Tateo,  "II  dialogo  'realistico'  di  Poggio  Bracciolini,"  in:  Tateo,  Tradizione  e  realtd  nelV 
umanesimo  italiano,  Bari  1967,  256-60;  Goldbrunner,  "Poggios  Dialog,"  aaO. 

44.  Bracciolini,  De  avaricia,  in:  Prosatori  latini  del  Quattrocento,  aaO.  274. 

45.  R.  Fubini,  "II  'Teatro  del  mondo'  nelle  prospettive  morali  e  storico-politiche  di 
Poggio  Bracciolini,"  in:  Poggio  Bracciolini  1380-1980,  Nel  VI  centenario  della  nascita,  Fi- 
renze  1982,  38. 

46.  Bracciolini,  De  avaricia,  aaO.  262. 

47.  Ibid.  264. 

48.  Oppel,  "The  Dialogue  On  Avarice,""  aaO.  578. 

49.  Bracciolini,  Opera,  aaO.  f.  19r. 

50.  Ibid. 

51.  Ibid.  f.  19v. 

52.  N.  Machiavelli,  //  Principe  XV. 

53.  E.  Garin,  "II  pensiero  di  Leon  Battista  Alberti:  Caratteri  e  contrasti,"  in:  Ri- 
nascimento.  Sec.  Serie  12,  1972,  5. 

54.  E.  Garin,  "La  letteratura  degli  umanisti,"  in:  Storia  della  letteratura  italiana,  Di- 
rettori:  E.  Cecchi  e  N.  Sapegno,  III,  Milano  1965,  209. 

55.  L.  B.  Alberti,  Defunctus,  in:  Alberti,  Opera  inedita  et  pauca  separatim  impressa  G. 
Mzincini  curante,  Florentiae  1890,  179. 

56.  Ibid.  221. 

57.  Alberti,  Momus  0  del principe  II,  Testo  critico  ...  a  cura  di  G.  Marini,  Bologna 
1942,  99. 

58.  Ibid.  98  f. 

59.  Machiavelli,  //  Principe  XVII,  in:  Machiavelli,  //  Principe  e  Discorsi  sopra  la  prima 
deca  di  Tito  Livio  ...  a  cura  di  S.  Bertelli,  Milano  1960,  69. 

60.  Alberti,  Momus,  aaO.  99. 

61.  Alberti,  Fatum  et  Fortuna,  in:  Prosatori  latini,  aaO.  646. 

62.  Alberti,  Theogenius  II,  in:  Alberti,  Opere  volgari  II,  a  cura  di  C.  Grayson,  Bari 
1966,  93. 

63.  V.  Stackelberg,  Franzosische  Moralistik,  aaO.  42. 

64.  E.  R.  Curtius,  Gesammelte  Aufsdtze  zur  romanischen  Philologie,  Bern  u.  Miinchen 
1960,  467. 


Fausto  Sozzini  source  du  Pari  de  Pascal? 

Jacques  Chomarat 

Lai  recherche  des  sources  du  P2iri  de  Pascal  est  un  genre  deconseille 
par  les  specialistes  de  cet  auteur^  et  le  cas  s'aggrave  si  Ton  pretend 
rapprocher  le  grand  janseniste  (expression  elle-meme  tombee  en 
desuetude)  de  I'antitrinitaire,  fondateur  d'une  Eglise  qui  existe  encore.  Mon 
excuse  sera  que  je  n'ai  pas  cherche:  c'est  en  lisant  Sozzini  (Socinus,  Socin) 
pour  des  raisons  presque  fortuites  que  j'ai  ete  invinciblement  conduit  au  sou- 
venir du  Pari;  ayant  regarde  le  probleme  de  plus  pres  je  n'ai  trouve  nuUe 
part  dans  la  litterature  specialisee  trace  d'un  tel  rapprochement;  il  m'a  semble 
que,  sans  pretendre  apporter  une  demonstration  decisive,  je  pouvais  fournir 
quelques  arguments  en  faveur  d'une  influence  de  Socin  sur  Pascad.  On  ana- 
lysera  d'abord  brievement  le  fragment  Infini  Rim  dans  les  Pensees,  puis  plus 
en  detail  I'opuscule  De  Auctoritate  Sacrae  Scripturae  de  Socin:  I'analogie  entre  les 
deux  pensees  apparaitra  d'elle-meme;  ensuite  on  examinera  le  probleme  de 
fait:  Pascal  a-t-il  pu  avoir  connaiss2ince  du  texte  de  Socin,  et  comment? 

Le  fragment  Infini-Rier^  fait  dialoguer  deux  interlocuteurs:  I'un,  croyant,  est 
le  porte-parole  de  Pascal  lui-meme;  I'autre  est  un  homme  en  quete  de  la  verite 
religieuse  par  le  seul  moyen  de  la  raison;  tous  deux  des  le  depart  de  I'entre- 
tien  reconnaissent  I'impuissance  de  la  raison  a  prouver  I'existence  de  Dieu: 
celui-ci  par  defmition  est  infmi,  c'est  dire  que  son  essence  echappe  a  la  rai- 
son, comment  pourrait-elle  done  demontrer  I'existence  d'un  etre  dont  elle  ne 
sait  rien?  "Nous  ne  pouvons  savoir  ce  qu'il  est,  ni  s'il  est."  Si  le  croyant  peut 
sans  contradiction  soutenir  en  meme  temps  qu'il  ne  connait  pas  la  nature  de 
Dieu  et  qu'il  est  assure  par  la  foi  de  son  existence,  le  "libertin"  ne  peut  que 
suspendre  son  jugement. 

Dans  une  deuxieme  etape  Pascal  montre  ^  son  interlocuteur  que  cette  ab- 
stention raisonnable  est  en  fait  impossible;  s'abstenir  c'est  vivre  comme  un  athee, 
done  s'exposer  a  etre  juge  comme  tel.  Le  probleme  religieux  n'est  pas  seule- 
ment  ni  principalement  theorique,  il  est  surtout  pratique;  au  probleme  de  I'exis- 
tence de  Dieu  est  li6  celui  de  la  vie  eternelle.  C'est  en  ce  point  qu'intervient 


598  FAUSTO  SOZZINI  SOURCE  DU  PARI  DE  PASCAL? 

rargument  du  pari,  stricto  sensu;  s'il  n'y  a  pas  de  preuve  pour  ou  centre  la  realite 
de  la  vie  eternelle,  si  le  choix  entre  les  deux  modes  de  vie,  celui  du  chretien 
et  celui  de  I'athee,  est  une  sorte  de  pari,  dans  quel  sens  le  calcul  des  proba- 
bilites  nous  invite-t-il  a  parier?  Pascal  fait  intervenir  la  mise,  c'est-a-dire  les 
biens  terrestres,  que  j'aurai  perdus  si,  ayant  parie  pour  la  vie  eternelle,  je  tombe 
dans  le  neant;  ensuite  I'enjeu  c'est-a-dire  une  vie  eternelle  de  beatitude  si 
je  gagne  mon  pari;  enfin  il  faut  considerer  la  probabilite  que  le  pari  soit  gagne. 
Sans  vouloir  entrer  dans  le  detail  mathematique  du  calcul,  on  doit  souligner 
deux  traits  importants  du  raisonnement.  D'abord  ce  qui  permet  de  conclure 
en  faveur  de  la  vie  eternelle  comme  choix  "optimal"  c'est  la  disproportion  entre 
le  fmi  et  I'infmi;  cela  domine  tout  le  calcul:  "Et  ainsi  notre  proposition  est  dans 
une  force  infmie,  quand  il  y  a  le  fmi  a  hasarder,  a  un  jeu  ou  il  y  a  pareils 
hasards  de  gain  que  de  perte  et  I'infini  a  gagner."^  Le  second  trait,  rarement 
releve,  est  I'absence  de  I'Enfer  dans  le  calcul;  pour  que  celui-ci  soit  complet, 
il  aurait  fallu,  semble-t-il  en  bonne  logique,  faire  jouer  un  role  non  seulement 
a  cette  vie-ci,  au  Paradis  (si  Dieu  existe)  et  au  neant  (si  Dieu  n'existe  pas), 
mais  aussi  al'eternite  de  souffrances  infinies,  lot  du  damne.  L'omission  frappe 
d'autant  plus  que  I'Enfer  tient  par  ailleurs  une  place  importante  dans  la  doc- 
trine de  Pascal:  "Entre  nous  et  I'enfer  ou  le  ciel  il  n'y  a  que  la  vie  entre  deux 
qui  est  la  chose  du  monde  la  plus  fragile."  et  "Qui  a  plus  sujet  de  craindre  I'en- 
fer, ou  celui  qui  est  dans  I'ignorance  s'il  y  a  un  enfer,  et  dans  la  certitude  de 
la  damnation  s'il  y  en  a;  ou  celui  qui  est  dans  une  certaine  persuasion  qu'il 
y  a  un  enfer,  et  dans  I'esperance  d'etre  sauve  s'il  est."^  Expliquer  l'omission 
de  I'enfer  par  le  souci  delicat  de  ne  pas  effaroucher  le  "libertin"  de  bonne  foi 
serait  deraisonnablement  preter  a  Pascal  un  mensonge  delibere  sur  un  point 
de  la  croyance  qu'il  tient  lui-meme  pour  capital.  Faute  d'une  explication  en 
quelque  sorte  interieure  au  raisonnement  lui-meme  on  pourrait  etre  conduit 
a  en  rechercher  une  accidentelle  et  exterieure;  I'influence  du  texte  de  Socin, 
on  le  verra,  serait  une  explication  de  ce  genre. 

Quoi  qu'il  en  soit  I'interlocuteur  de  Pascal,  dans  le  fragment  Infini-Rien,  est 
desormais  persuade  que  la  raison  mathematique  I'oblige  a  parier  pour  la  vie 
eternelle  et  I'existence  du  Dieu  chretien.  Pascal  I'invite  alors,  tres  logique- 
ment,  a  s'instruire  de  I'ensemble  de  la  doctrine  chretienne,  c'est-a-dire  a  se 
tourner  vers  "I'Ecriture  et  le  reste,  etc."^  La  religion  en  effet  n'est  pas  fondee 
sur  la  raison,  il  faut  le  repeter,  mais  seulement  sur  la  Revelation;  c'est  ce 
que  dit  le  passage  bien  connu  du  Memorial:  "Dieu  d' Abraham,  Dieu  d'Isaac, 
Dieu  de  Jacob,  /  non  des  philosophes  et  des  savants."^  L'expression  elliptique 
"et  le  reste"  designe  tout  ce  qui  fait  cortege  a  I'Ecriture,  la  soutient,  fournit 
les  preuves  historiques  de  sa  veracite  et  de  sa  verite:  les  miracles,  les  prophe- 
ties,  les  figures  (c'est  I'interpretation  spirituelle  de  I'Ancien  Testament  comme 
annonciateur  du  Christ  et  de  I'Evangile),  perpetuite  (ou  continuite  depuis 
les  origines  du  monde  de  la  religion  juive  et  chretienne),  etc. ;  toutes  ces  preuves 
sont  esquissees  en  autcint  de  liasses  preparatoires  a  YApologie  de  la  religion 


JACQUES  CHOMARAT  599 

chretienne  dont  les  Pensees  sont  le  chantier.^  Ici  dans  le  fragment  Infini-Rien  qui 
est  comme  une  mise  en  scene  du  drame  de  la  conversion  il  y  a  un  hiatus  qui 
correspond  a  un  laps  de  temps  pendant  lequel  le  "libertin",  docile  a  I'invita- 
tion  de  Pascal,  prend  scrupuleusement  connaissance  "de  I'Ecriture  et  du  reste"; 
mais  au  terme  de  son  etude  il  n'est  toujours  pas  persuade  de  la  verite  de  la 
religion  chretienne:  ".  .  .  je  suis  fait  d'une  telle  sorte  que  je  ne  puis  croire.  Que 
voulez-vous  done  que  je  fasse?"^ 

C'est  alors  le  quatrieme  et  avant-dernier  acte.^  Pascal  conseille  a  son  inter- 
locuteur,  convaincu  qu'il  est  plus  raisonnable  de  croire,  mais  qui  n'y  reussit 
pas,  de  faire  comme  s'il  croyait,  de  respecter  dans  son  existence  quotidienne 
les  commandements  de  Dieu,  de  mener  la  vie  d'un  chretien  pieux  et  fidele. 
Ce  "comme  si"  aura  trois  effets.  Tout  d'abord  la  pratique  fera  naitre  peu  a 
peu  la  croyance;  sur  ce  point,  comme  I'a  montre  Jean  Orcib2il,  Pascal  s'ins- 
pire  des  analyses  de  Charron:^^  la  plupart  des  croyances  reposent  sur  la 
"coutume";  c'est  par  coutume,  dit  Pascal,  que  les  Mahometans  croient  a  leur 
religion,  par  coutume  aussi  que  beaucoup  de  Chretiens  croient  a  la  leur.^* 
Bien  entendu  cette  croyance  tout  humaine  n'est  pas  la  foi,  laquelle  est  un  don 
de  Dieu;  "Naturellement  meme  cela  vous  fera  croire  et  vous  abetira"^^;  il  faut 
ici  bien  prendre  garde  a  I'adverbe.  En  second  lieu,  pour  vivre  "comme"  un 
chretien,  on  est  oblige  de  lutter  contre  ses  passions  (amour-propre,  concu- 
piscences diverses);  or  celles-ci  sont  le  principal  obstacle  qui  empeche  la  grace 
divine  d'agir  efficacement;  la  pratique  religieuse  a  done  pour  effet  d'"6ter  les 
obstacles,"  de  frayer  pour  ainsi  dire  la  voie  a  la  grace  qui  seule  peut  faire  naitre 
la  vraie  foi.^^  Enfin  ce  "comme  si"  a  un  troisieme  effet:  meme  d'un  point  de 
vue  tout  terrestre  une  vie  pieuse  est  plus  heureuse  qu'une  vie  impie;  on  gagne 
au  change  quand  on  renonce  aux  "plaisirs  empestes"  pour  atteindre  la  paix 
de  I'ame:  "Vous  serez  fidele,  honnete,  humble,  reconnaissant,  bienfaisant, 
ami  sincere,  veritable,"  "Je  vous  dis  que  vous  y  gagnerez  en  cette  vie."  Ainsi 
meme  si  le  pari  en  faveur  de  la  vie  eternelle  etait  perdu,  le  libertin  n'aurait 
rien  sacrifie:  "vous  avez  parie  pour  une  chose  certaine,  infmie,  pour  laquelle 
vous  n'avez  rien  donne."^* 

Telle  est  dans  ses  grandes  lignes  I'argumentation  de  Pascal.  Remontons  main- 
tenant  de  quelques  dizaines  d'annees  en  arriere.  L'opuscule  de  Socin  De  Auc- 
toritate  Sacrae  Scripturae^^  contient  un  developpement  dont  la  structure  de 
pensee  est  fort  proche  a  certains  egards  de  celle  du  fragment  Infini-Rien.  Avant 
d'analyser  ce  passage  il  est  necessaire  de  presenter  I'ensemble  de  I'argumen- 
tation qui  lui  donne  son  plein  sens.  Le  mieux  est,  pour  cela,  de  reproduire 
I'abrege  que  I'auteur  lui-meme  en  donne  en  tete  du  livre: 
"1"  II  est  demontre  a  ceux  qui  croient  deja  a  la  verite  de  la  religion 
chretienne  qu'ils  n'ont  pas  le  droit  de  douter  de  I'autorite  des  livres  de  I'An- 
cien  et  du  Nouveau  Testament. 

2"  La  meme  chose  est  demontree  a  ceux  qui  ne  croient  pas  encore  a  la 
verite  de  la  religion  chretienne.  D'abord  a  ceux  qui  croient  qu'il  y  a  ou  qu'il 


600  FAUSTO  SOZZINI  SOURCE  DU  PARI  DE  PASCAL? 

peut  y  avoir  une  religion  vraie.  Ensuite  a  ceux  qui  estiment  qu'il  ne  peut  y 

avoir  aucune  religion  vraie. 

3°  II  est  brievement  prouve  a  tous  en  general  que  personne  ne  peut  avancer 

la  moindre  raison  legitime  de  ne  pas  ajouter  foi  a  ces  livres. 

4°  II  est  montre  qu'on  doit  davantage  ajouter  foi  a  ces  livres  qu'a  tous  les  au- 

tres  qui  contiennent  un  enseignement  ou  un  recit  historique  (docirinam  histo- 

riamue). 

5°  Est  devoilee  I'erreur  de  ceux  qui,  pour  ajouter  foi  a  ces  livres,  deman- 

dent  des  preuves  telles  que  nul  ne  puisse  leur  opposer  la  moindre  objection."*^ 

Admettre  Tautorite  de  I'Ecriture  c'est  d'abord  croire  a  la  realite  des  evene- 
ments  attestes  dans  les  recits  evangeliques:  les  miracles  du  Christ,  sa  mort 
ignominieuse  et  sa  resurrection;  c'est  ensuite  et  par  voie  de  consequence  con- 
siderer  comme  vraie  la  doctrine  prechee  par  le  Christ:  la  vie  eternelle  bien- 
heureuse  est  promise  a  ceux  qui  auront  suivi  les  preceptes  de  charite  que 
resument  les  Beatitudes.^''  Fonder  en  raison  I'autorite  de  I'Ecriture  c'est  done 
faire  I'apologie  de  la  religion  chretienne;  ce  dessein  et  cette  methode  sont  ceux 
meme  de  Pascal;  les  arguments  purement  rationnels  en  faveur  de  I'existence 
de  Dieu  sont  reconnus  comme  inefficaces,  inagissants;^^  les  seules  preuves  va- 
lides  sont  historiques,  ce  sont  celles  qui  font  admettre  la  verite  du  temoi- 
gnage  de  I'Ecriture.  Entre  Pascal  et  Socin  il  y  a  cependant  une  difference 
immediatement  visible:  ce  dernier  ne  s'adresse  pas  aux  seuls  incroyants,  dou- 
teurs  ou  athees  declares,  mais  d'abord  aux  croyants;  cependant  cette  difference 
ne  tire  pas  a  consequence,  car  que  seraient  des  croyants  qui  ne  seraient  pas 
convaincus  de  la  verite  de  I'Ecriture,  sinon  des  demi-croyants,  des  chretiens 
tiedes,  purement  exterieurs  en  quelque  sorte;  en  fin  de  compte  ils  ne  sont  la 
que  par  un  souci  de  Socin  d'etre  exhaustif;  mais  en  fait  ceux  auxquels  il  s'a- 
dresse vraiment  sont  ceux-la  meme  que  Pascal  essaiera  d'attirer  a  I'Ecriture 
et  a  la  foi  en  elle,  fondement  de  la  religion  chretienne. 

Les  destinataires  reels  de  I'opuscule  comprennent  ceux  qui  doutent  de  la 
verite  de  cette  religion  et  ceux  qui  la  nient;  parmi  ces  derniers  les  uns  croient 
encore  qu'il  peut  y  avoir  une  religion  vraie,  d'autres  sont  persuades  que  toute 
religion  existante  ou  possibfe  est  fausse.^^  Ils  "pensent  que  la  religion  est  une 
invention  humaine  et  se  moquent  d'elle,  estimant  qu'il  est  absolument  vain  d'es- 
perer  ou  de  craindre  qu'ils  seront  recompenses  ou  punis  par  Dieu  pour  leur 
bonne  ou  leur  mauvaise  conduite";  ils  rejettent  toute  idee  de  miracle  et  "rap- 
portent  tout  a  des  causes  naturelles."^^  Vouloir  prouver  Dieu  a  de  tels 
hommes  par  des  arguments  de  type  philosophique  echouera  necessairement. 
Si  la  croyance  en  Dieu  etait  rationnelle  elle  serait  commune  a  tous  les  hommes 
puisqu'ils  ont  tous  la  raison;  or  en  fait  des  peuples  entiers  sont  athees  et  ce 
fait  suffit  a  frapper  de  caducite  toute  apologetique  "rationaliste."  "Puisque  la 
religion  n'est  en  aucune  mzmiere  une  chose  naturelle  (car  si  elle  I'etait  on  ne 
trouverait  point  de  nations  absolument  depourvues  de  toute  religion,  comme 
on  en  a  trouve  a  notre  epoque  dans  certaines  contrees,  et  nommement  dans 


JACQUES  CHOMARAT  6oi 

le  pays  du  Bresil,  ainsi  que  I'attestent  des  ecriv2dns  dignes  de  foi  et  comme 
me  I'a  affirme  avec  Constance  un  moine  franciscain  de  Pistoia,  un  predicateur, 
de  ceux  qu'on  appelle  d'ordinaire  Capucins,  homme  de  naissance  noble,  tout 
a  fait  sage  et  intelligent,  qui  avait  ete  dzins  ce  pays),  done  puisque  la  religion 
n'est  en  aucune  maniere  une  donnee  naturelle,  mais  que,  si  elle  est  vraie,  elle 
est  une  revelation  divine,  etc."^^  C'est  manifestement  une  erreur  de  voir  en 
Socin  un  rationaliste,  un  deiste,  le  tenant  d'une  religion  naturelle;  au  contrai- 
re,  pour  lui  comme  pour  Pascal  la  religion  ne  peut  se  fonder  que  sur  la  Revela- 
tion, done  sur  I'autorite  de  I'Ecriture. 

Pour  faire  admettre  celle-ci  Socin  emploie  des  arguments  differents  selon 
qu'il  s'adresse  a  ceux  qui  croient  encore  a  la  possibilite  d'une  religion  vraie 
ou  a  ceux  qui  la  nient  absolument.  Pour  convaincre  les  premiers  il  suffit  de 
leur  montrer  que  le  christianisme  est  superieur  a  toute  autre  religion  connue 
dans  I'histoire;  seul,  affirme  Socin,  le  christianisme  a  eu  des  martyrs  qui  ont 
consenti  a  mourir  pour  attester  sa  verite;  dans  ses  premiers  siecles  il  a  fait 
de  nombreux  convertis  parmi  les  adeptes  des  autres  religions  et  s'est  repandu 
avec  une  extreme  rapidite  par  des  moyens  pacifiques.^^  On  retrouvera  ce 
type  d'argumentation  chez  Pascal:  le  christianisme,  dit-il,  a  ete  historique- 
ment  superieur  aux  autres  religions  comme  celles  de  la  Chine  et  il  met  lui  aussi 
en  avant  les  mcirtyrs:  "Je  ne  crois  que  les  histoires  dont  les  temoins  se  feraient 
egorger."^^  Socin  s'adresse  ensuite  aux  athees  declares  pour  leur  demontrer 
qu'il  est  impossible  de  recuser  le  temoignage  des  Evangiles  sur  les  miracles 
du  Christ,  sa  mort  et  sa  resurrection  et  done  la  verite  de  sa  promesse  puis- 
qu'il  a  le  premier  beneficie  de  la  vie  eternelle  qu'il  promettait  a  ses  disci- 
ples.^* Socin  insiste  sur  I'invraisemblance  de  la  supposition  d'une  fraude:  il  est 
impossible  que  les  Apotres  aient  pu  s'entendre  frauduleusement  pour  porter 
un  faux  temoignage;^^  I'argument  figure  aussi  chez  Pascal, ^^  attestant  que  la 
meme  hypothese  injurieuse  s'etait  transmise  du  XVP  au  XVIP  siecle  parmi 
les  libertins. 

C'est  alors  que  Socin  afin  de  renforcer  encore  la  croyance  en  la  verite  de 
I'Ecriture  introduit  I'argument  qui  nous  parait  annoncer  celui  du  pari.  Voici 
le  texte:  "Tout  homme  serait  juge  insense  (stultus)  s'il  croyait  meme  faible- 
ment  qu'en  deboursant  seulement  un  quart  d'as  il  peut  gagner  quelques  mil- 
liers  de  pieces  d'or  et  s'il  ne  s'empressait  pas  de  le  debourser.  De  meme,  a 
moins  d'avoir  I'esprit  derange,  si  un  homme  croyait  si  peu  que  ce  fut  qu'a 
condition  de  debourser  en  quelque  sorte  tous  les  biens  de  cette  vie  mortelle 
et  cette  vie  elle-meme,  pour  obeir  a  Dieu  selon  les  preceptes  de  Jesus  de 
Nazareth,  il  obtiendrait  une  autre  vie,  immortelle,  cette  fois,  et  pleine  d'un 
bonheur  profond  et  sans  fin,  (chose  necessaire  si  les  evenements  rapportes 
par  les  evangelistes  sont  reels),  cet  homme  deciderait  d'agir  ainsi.  Pourtant 
nous  constatons  que  bien  peu  sont  resolus  a  le  faire.  D'ou  il  suit  evidemment 
que  seul  un  tout  petit  nombre  a  foi,  meme  faiblement,  dans  ces  auteurs.  (.  .  .) 
Or  il  est  inutile  de  demontrer  qu'une  vie  immortelle,  pleine  d'un  bonheur  pro- 


602  FAUSTO  SOZZINI  SOURCE  DU  PARI  DE  PASCAL? 

fond  et  sans  fin,  si  on  la  compare  a  notre  vie  mortelle  comblee  de  tous  les 
biens  possibles  pendant  toute  sa  duree,  est  exactement  comme  plusieurs  mil- 
liers  de  pieces  d'or  comparees  a  un  petit  quart  d'as;  cela  est  tout  a  fait  clair 
pour  tout  le  monde.  Bien  plus  c'est  une  evidence  qu'elle  est  incomparable- 
ment  superieure.  Car  entre  un  quart  d'as  et  des  milliers  de  pieces  d'or  il  y 
a  tout  de  meme  quelque  mesure  et  proportion:  ce  sont  des  realites  finies;  mais 
entre  cette  vie  mortelle  et  la  vie  immortelle,  entre  les  biens  passagers  d'ici-bas 
et  les  biens  etemels  de  I'au-dela  il  n'y  a  aucune  mesure  ou  proportion,  puisque 
la  vie  et  les  biens  d'ici-bas  sont  fmis  et  que  ceux-la  sont  infmis.  En  outre  il 
y  a  une  difference  de  qualite  entre  I'une  des  vies  avec  ses  biens  d'un  seul  genre 
et  I'autre;  la  qualite  est,  sans  comparaison  possible,  superieure  du  cote  de 
I'autre  vie,  alors  que  plusieurs  milliers  de  pieces  d'or  ne  sont  en  fm  de  compte 
rien  d'autre  qu'un  quart  d'as  multiplie  par  je  ne  sais  combien  de  mille.  De 
plus  nul  n'obtient  ici-bas  tous  les  biens  possibles  ou  n'espere  les  obtenir;  in- 
versement  tous  les  fideles  de  Jesus  de  Nazareth  ne  deboursent  pas,  c'est-a- 
dire  ne  perdent  pas  leur  vie  mortelle  plus  que  ne  font  les  autres  hommes;  et 
meme  un  assez  grand  nombre  d'entre  eux  ont  plus  largement  part  aux  biens 
d'ici-bas  et  vivent  plus  longuement  que  ceux  qui  n'obeissent  pas  a  Jesus.  Et 
peut-etre  aurais-je  le  droit  d'ajouter  que  n'importe  quel  fidele  de  Jesus,  si  mal- 
heureux  qu'il  paraisse,  doit  etre  considere  des  ici-bas  comme  plus  heureux 
que  n'importe  quel  non-fidele."^^  Certes  ce  texte  est  lourd  et  la  faute  n'en  in- 
combe  pas  au  seul  traducteur;  il  n'y  aucun  de  ces  traits  eblouissants  qui  emeu- 
vent  chez  Pascal;  mais,  mise  a  part  I'invitation  a  faire  comme  si  Ton  croyait, 
qui  a  sa  source  chez  Charron,  le  reste  de  I'argumentation  est  fort  voisin  chez 
Socin  et  chez  Pascal;  I'appareil  mathematique  est  moins  developpe  chez  le 
premier,  mais  la  notion  de  probabilite  est  presente  dans  la  formule  "croire 
si  peu  que  ce  soit"  (cum  uel  leuissime  credat,  quantumuis  leuiter  credat)  qui,  sous  une 
apparence  subjective,  traduit  la  notion  de  probabilite.  Et  on  a  bien  affaire  aussi 
a  un  pari  avec  sa  mise,  la  vie  d'ici-bas,  ses  biens,  et  son  enjeu,  une  eternite 
de  bonheur  dans  I'autre  vie;  de  meme,  comme  chez  Pascal  encore,  le  sacrifice 
de  la  vie  terrestre  n'est  qu'une  apparence  puisqu'en  fin  de  compte  le  fidele  du 
Christ  est  plus  heureux  des  maintenant.  Les  deux  traits  essentiels  que  nous 
avions  releves  dans  le  pari  de  Pascal  sont  presents  dans  celui  de  Socin:  c'est 
la  disproportion  entre  un  terme  fini  et  un  infini  qui  determine  le  choix  en  fa- 
veur  de  la  croyance.  Ensuite  il  y  a  deux  termes  seulement,  la  vie  terrestre  et 
la  beatitude  eternelle;  mais  I'absence  de  I'Enfer  qui  etonnait  chez  Pascal  n'a 
rien  que  de  logique  chez  Socin  puisqu'il  en  nie  I'existence,  comme  on  le  sait 
par  ses  autres  ouvrages;^^  les  impies,  dans  son  systeme,  ne  sont  pas  damnes, 
mais  seulement  ecartes  du  bienfait  de  la  vie  eternelle  bienheureuse  que  Dieu 
accorde,  selon  les  promesses  du  Christ,  I'homme  divin,  a  ceux  qui  auront  suivi 
ses  preceptes;  la  mort,  I'entree  dans  le  neant,  qui  chez  Socin  tient  lieu  de 
damnation,  n'est  meme  pas  un  chatiment  de  la  faute  originelle  puisqu'elle  etait 
des  la  Creation  attachee  a  la  nature  humaine;^^  c'est  I'immortalite  qui  est 


JACQUES  CHOMARAT  603 

un  privilege.  Un  pari  a  deux  termes,  sans  Enfer,  est  tout  a  fait  coherent  dans 
une  telle  doctrine,  il  ne  Test  guere  dans  une  pensee  comme  celle  de  Pascal; 
I'absence  de  I'Enfer  dans  le  fragment  Infini-Rien  ne  pourrait-elle  pas  s'expli- 
quer  par  I'hypothese  que  Pascal  aurait  pris  son  point  de  depart  du  texte  de 
Socin;  il  en  aurait  tire  I'argument  du  pari,  I'aurait  enrichi,  marque  de  son 
sceau,  mais  sans  en  modifier  la  structure  duelle. 

Un  dernier  rapprochement  merite  d'etre  fait,  meme  s'il  ne  concerne  plus 
le  passage  Infmi-Rien.  Dans  son  cinquieme  chapitre  Socin  refute  ceux  qui 
exigent  pour  admettre  I'autorite  de  I'Ecriture^^  des  arguments  ayant  la  force 
de  I'evidence,  les  hommes  a  qui  ne  suffisent  ni  les  miracles  ni  la  Perpetuite 
de  la  meme  religion  depuis  les  origines.^^  Le  manque  d'evidence  n'est  pas  une 
faiblesse,  il  est  voulu  par  Dieu:  "Dieu,  ecrit  Socin,  a  juge  suffisant  que  ces 
ecrits  et  tous  ceux  qui  garantissent  la  recompense  (de  la  beatitude  eternelle) 
soient  tels  qu'on  puisse  et  que  legitimement  on  doive  leur  ajouter  foi,  mais 
tels  finalement  que,  s'ils  suffisent  pour  I'homme  honnete  ou  celui  qui  peut  aise- 
ment  le  devenir,  ils  ne  suffisent  pourtant  pas  pour  I'homme  malhonnete  que 
sa  malice  empeche  de  devenir  honnete;  ainsi  par  ce  moyen  I'honnetete  des 
uns  et  la  malice  des  autres  est  mise  au  jour,  Dieu  est  ainsi  pleinement  fonde 
a  punir  les  uns  et  a  recompenser  les  autres. "^^  On  a  ici  le  germe  visible,  et 
meme  plus  que  le  germe  de  I'argument  pascalien  du  "Dieu  cache":  "II  y  a  assez 
de  clarte  pour  eclairer  les  elus  et  assez  d'obscurite  pour  les  humilier.  II  y  a 
assez  d'obscurite  pour  aveugler  les  reprouves  et  assez  de  clarte  pour  les  con- 
damner  et  les  rendre  inexcusables."^^  Ainsi  chez  les  deux  penseurs  le  manque 
d'evidence  des  preuves  de  la  religion  est  un  argument  indirect  supplemen- 
taire  en  sa  faveur  et  fonde  la  separation  entre  les  elus  et  les  autres;  il  serait 
absurde  que  la  religion  soit  plus  clairement  demontree. 

Tous  ces  rapprochements  amenent  a  poser  la  question  de  fait:  Pascal  a-t-il 
pu  connaitre  le  De  Sacrae  Scripturae  Auctoritate?  et  la  reponse  est:  plutot  deux 
fois  qu'une.  II  est  occupe  des  1656  a  rediger  les  Provinciales  et  des  1658  la 
future  Apologie  de  la  religion  chretienne.  A  cette  derniere  date  le  texte  de  Socin 
a  deja  paru  trois  fois.  D'abord  en  1588  a  Hispalis  (Seville)  sous  le  nom  de 
Domingo  Lopez,  de  la  Societe  de  Jesus;  ce  personnage  fictif  est  encore  ca- 
talogue comme  reel  en  1642  dans  la  Bibliotheca  Scriptorum  Societatis  Jesu  du  Jesui- 
te  Philippe  Alegambe  parue  a  Bruxelles.  Le  meme  texte  avec  de  menues 
retouches  et  surtout  la  suppression  de  la  Preface  (qui  en  1588  admettait  en- 
core pour  certains  la  validite  de  la  preuve  de  Dieu  par  I'ordre  du  monde)  parait 
en  1611  a  Rakow  en  Pologne  ou  s'etait  etabli  Socin,  avec  un  avis  au  lecteur 
date  du  l^""  avril  1611;  on  y  apprend  que  I'ouvrage  a  ete  ecrit  il  y  a  quarante 
et  quelques  annees  en  langue  vernaculaire,  avant  d'etre  traduit  en  latin,  "in 
gratiam  magni  cuiusdam  uiri";  or  d'apres  la  Vita  authoris  conscripta  ab  Equite  Po- 
lono  placee  en  tete  de  la  3*^  edition,  celle  de  1656,  dont  il  va  etre  question, 
Socin  aurait  vecu  de  1562  a  1574  en  Toscane,  a  la  cour  du  souverain;  de 
\k  on  pourrait  former  I'hypothese  que  le  De  Auctoritate  aurait  €x€  congu  en 


604  FAUSTO  SOZZINI   SOURCE  DU  PARI  DE  PASCAL? 

Toscane  et  que  les  incroyants  dont  parle  I'auteur  auraient  ete  des  Florentins; 
peut-etre  meme  le  "magnus  quidam  uir"  aurait-il  pu  etre  soit  Cosme  de 
Medicis  qui  devint  Grand  Due  de  Toscane  en  1569  soit  son  fils  Francesco  qui 
lui  succeda  en  1574  peu  apres  le  depart  de  Socin.  Enfin  apres  la  mort  de 
Socin  le  texte  de  la  2^  edition  fut  reproduit  au  tome  I  de  la  Bibliotheca  Fratrum 
Polonorum  publiee  "post  annum  Domini  1656"  a  Irenopolis  (Amsterdam);  cette 
reedition  est  due  a  des  Antitrinitaires  refugies  de  Pologne,  aides  par  des 
Remontrants  (ou  Arminiens)  hollandais.^'^  Cette  edition  connut  un  grand 
succes:  "au  lieu  qu'on  n'auroit  pas  eu  pour  deux  cents  pistoles,  il  y  a  peu 
d'annees,  une  petite  partie  de  ces  Oeuvres,  on  les  a  a  present  pour  moins 
de  dix."'' 

On  sait  que  pour  rediger  les  Provinciales  Pascal,  guide  par  Arnaud  et  Nicole 
a  lu  ou  au  moins  feuillete  maints  jesuites  espagnols;  a  cote  de  tant  de  ca- 
suistes  il  est  fort  possible  qu'il  ait  rencontre  un  apologete;  le  soi-disant 
Lopez  ^  n'expose  aucune  des  theses  hardies  qui  feront  plus  tard  de  Socin  le 
maitre  des  Antitrinitaires  (negation  de  la  Trinite,  de  I'lncarnation,  de  la 
Redemption,  de  I'Enfer;  ce  dernier  est  passe  sous  silence,  mais  non  expresse- 
ment  rejete  dans  le  De  Auctoritate)  et  rien  chez  ce  pseudo-jesuite  ne  pouvait 
choquer  Pascal.  C'est  done  une  premiere  voie  par  o\x  il  a  pu  rencontrer  I'oeuvre 
oil  est  esquisse  I'argument  du  pari.  D'autre  part  la  Bibliotheca  fratrum  Polonorum 
a  du  tres  vite  se  repandre  en  France  aussi  bien  dans  les  milieux  religieux 
(comme  en  temoigne  I'exemplaire  de  la  Bibliotheque  Nationale)  que  chez  les 
libertins  dont  certains  etaient  en  relations  avec  les  heterodoxes  de  Hol- 
lande.^^  Par  cette  voie  aussi  Pascal  aurait  pu  connaitre  les  arguments  de  Socin 
et  en  tirer  parti  malgre  le  caractere  maintenant  reconnu  comme  heretique 
de  I'auteur.  De  plus  longues  recherches  seraient  encore  necessaires  pour  ar- 
river  a  des  probabilites  plus  grandes  en  ce  domaine. 

En  tout  etat  de  cause,  un  fait  reste  indubitable:  I'analogie  entre  les  deux 
pensees,  le  meme  argument  d'un  pari  assorti  d'une  evaluation  chiffree  et  d'une 
comparaison  entre  deux  vies,  le  meme  arriere-plan  d'une  religion  fondee  sur 
la  seule  Revelation,  les  memes  destinataires  incroyants.  Meme  s'il  ne  s'a- 
gissait  que  d'une  rencontre  et  non  d'une  influence  elle  ne  serait  pas  fortuite, 
mais  significative  d'un  certain  etat  de  la  pensee  religieuse  reagissant  au  sur- 
gissement,  de  moins  en  moins  couvert,  d'une  pensee  libertine  qui  rejette  les 
arguments  traditionnels  que  les  theologiens,  se  fondant  sur  la  raison,  utili- 
saient  pour  prouver  comme  verites  universelles  quelques-unes  des  theses  prin- 
cipales  du  christianisme,  a  commencer  par  I'existence  de  Dieu  et  sa  Providence. 
Malgre  les  differences  manifestes  entre  les  deux  esprits  tous  deux  ont  en  com- 
mun  ce  trait  paradoxal:  la  force  de  la  raison  est  employee  au  desaveu  de  la 
raison  et  au  plaidoyer  pour  I'autorite  de  la  seule  Ecriture;  menacee  sur  le  ter- 
rain de  la  raison  par  le  scepticisme  ou  I'atheisme  la  croyance  doit  audacieuse- 
ment  rompre  les  ponts  et  echapper  aux  objections  en  se  plagant  sur  un  autre 
plan  ou  elle  sera  invulnerable.  Ainsi  la  pensee  de  Socin  et  celle  de  Pascal  sont 


JACQUES  CHOMARAT  605 

visiblement  determinees  par  celle  meme  des  libertins  qu'ils  veulent  reduire 
et  mettre  en  echec  par  une  demarche  qui  puisse  echapper  a  leur  refutation. 
II  est  vrai  que  la  Revelation  elle-meme  doit  etre  interpretee,  ce  qui  signifie 
qu'elle  est  soumise  a  discussion.  Le  rationalisme  rejete  d'un  cote  reparait 
de  I'autre:  Socin  simplifie  la  doctrine  chretienne,  evacue  une  bonne  part  du 
mystere  si  bien  que  sa  religion,  fondee  sur  la  seule  Revelation,  est  fort  proche 
d'un  deisme;  son  petit-fils  Wiszowaty  ecrira  une  Religio  rationalis  et  son  pro- 
pre  nom  deviendra  pour  Voltaire  symbole  de  cette  "religion  naturelle"  dont 
Socin  niait  I'existence.^^  De  son  cote  Pascal  conserve  et  meme  accentue  dans 
la  tradition  chretienne  le  dogme  le  plus  difficile  pour  la  raison,  comme  il  le 
souligne  lui-meme,^^  celui  de  la  transmission  du  peche  originel;  mais  il  la 
presente  moins  comme  une  verite  revelee,  que  comme  la  seule  cle  qui  rende 
intelligibles  les  contradictions  observables  de  la  nature  humaine,  la  seule  hy- 
pothese  en  quelque  sorte  scientifique  qui  puisse  rendre  compte  des  paradoxes 
que  nous  vivons;  cette  demarche  donne  a  I'enseignement  traditionnel  de  I'E- 
glise  une  figure  nouvelle,  en  harmonie  avec  les  exigences  de  la  raison  philo- 
sophique;  aussi  Pascal  est-il  le  seul  penseur  chretien  que  les  Philosophes  du 
siecle  suivant,  les  Voltaire  et  les  Condorcet  aient  pris  au  serieux  au  point  de 
tenter  de  le  refuter;  ils  n'ont  pas  imX.  cet  honneur  a  Bossuet  ou  a  Fenelon 
qui  au  moins  par  leur  pensee  proprement  religieuse  etaient  trop  eloignes  d'eux; 
seul  Pascal  parlait  un  langage  qu'ils  pouvaient  entendre  car  d'une  certaine  fagon 
il  etait  proche  du  leur. 


Notes 


1.  Per  Lonning,  Cet  Ejfrayani  Pari,  Vrin,  1980,  p.  133,  s'appuyant  sur  les  travaux 
de  Julien-Eymard. 

2.  Pascal,  Oeuvres  completes,  collection  llntegrale,  le  Seuil,  1963,  edition  Lafuma, 
Papiers  non  classes,  Serie  II,  §  418,  p.  550. 

3.  Ibid.  p.  551,  premiere  colonne,  fin  du  deuxieme  zilinea. 

4.  §§  152  et  748;  voir  aussi  S  427,  p.  553  Thorrible  necessite  d'etre  6ternellement 
aneantis  ou  malheureux,"  et:  "en  sortant  de  ce  monde  je  tombe  pour  jamais  ou  dans 
le  neant,  ou  dans  les  mains  d'un  Dieu  irrite,  sans  savoir  a  laquelle  de  ces  deux  con- 
ditions je  dois  etre  eternellement  en  partage." 

5.  P.  551,  premiere  colonne;  le  "etc."  montre  avec  quelle  rapidity  Pascal  a  jete  sur 
le  papier  ses  reflexions. 

6.  P.  618. 

7.  Section  I,  series  XVIII  ^  XXV;  section  III,  s6ries  XXXII  k  XXXIV;  un  sim- 
ple coup  d'oeil  sur  la  table,  p.  677  est  eclairant.  Pour  le  rapport  entre  judaisme  et  chris- 
tianisme:  "Les  vrais  juifs  et  les  vrais  chr6tiens  n'ont  qu'une  mSme  religion"  (Lafuma, 
§  453). 

8.  P.  551  dernier  alin6a. 


6o6  FAUSTO   SOZZINI   SOURCE  DU   PARI   DE  PASCAL: 


9.  Le  dernier  est  la  conversion  proprement  dite,  oeuvre  de  Dieu  qui  donne  la  grace. 

10.  Jean  Orcibal,  "Le  fragment  Infini-Rien  et  ses  sources,"  Blaise  Pascal,  I'homme  et 
Voeuvre,  Cahiers  de  Royaumont,  Editions  de  Minuit,  1956,  p.  159-76. 

11.  §  821,  p.  604. 

12.  P.  551,  deuxieme  colonne,  haut. 

13.  ".  .  .  Cela  diminue  les  passions  qui  sont  vos  grands  obstacles"  (S  418,  p.  551, 
deuxieme  colonne);  cf.  S  11,  p.  502  "Ordre.  Apres  la  lettre  qu'on  doit  chercher  Dieu, 
faire  la  lettre  d'oter  les  obstacles  qui  est  le  discours  de  la  Machine,  etc." 

14.  P.  551,  deuxieme  colonne. 

15.  Voir  le  premier  paragraphe  de  la  troisieme  partie  de  cette  communication.  Le 
titre  est  De  Sacrae  Scripturae  auctoritate  (1 588)  ou  DeAuctoritate  Sacrae  Scripturae  (1611  et  1656). 

16.  II  y  a  encore  un  6°  "Ce  qui  vient  d'etre  dit  est  en  partie  confirme  par  Tautorite 
de  Dante  Alighieri"  {Paradis,  XXIV,  88-111). 

17.  Quicumque  crediderit,  eaim  historiam  esse  veram,  credet  pariter,  veram  esse  Chris- 
tianam  religionem,  atque  idcirco  ob  desideratissimum  et  incomparabile  immortalitatis 
ac  beatitudinis  praemium  ab  ea  propositum,  studebit  esse  talis,  qualem  ilia  postulat, 
id  est  probus  sanctusque  et  moribus  vere  divine  praeditus.  (ed.  1588,  p.  56). 

18.  L'edition  de  1588  contient  une  Preface  qui  fait  allusion  aux  arguments  en  fa- 
veur  de  la  religion  tires  du  ciel,  du  soleil,  etc.  mais  I'ouvrage  lui-meme  nie  leur  ef- 
ficacite;  en  1611  cette  Preface  disparait,  comme  I'explique  un  avis  au  lecteur:  Affirmabat 
praefatio,  dari  naturalem  Dei  cognitionem,  quod  libellus  prorsus  negat.  Pour  Pascal 
voir  Lafuma  §§  3,  449  (p.  558  A),  429,  781. 

19.  Nam  aut  is  qui  dubitat  de  veritate  religionis  lesu  Christi,  eamue  falsam  etiam 
penitus  esse  existimat,  credit  esse,  vel  esse  posse  religionem  aliquam  veram;  aut  credit, 
religiones  omnes,  quae  sunt,  vel  esse  possunt,  esse  falsas;  et  idcirco  aut  negat,  Deum 
esse,  aut  non  concedit,  illius  cura  et  prouidentia  homines  singulatim  regi  et  gubernari 
(ed.  1588,  p.  33-34). 

20.  Hoc  certum  est,  quicumque  istam  opinionem  habent,  religionem  videlicet  hu- 
manum  esse  inuentum,  eamque  derident,  existimantes,  vanissimum  esse  sperare  vel 
metuere,  se  a  Deo  ob  sua  honesta  turpiaue  facta  praemio  poenaue  ulla  affectum  iri, 
certum  est,  inquam,  hos  similiter  ridere,  si  miracula  ulla  narrari  audiant  ab  hominibus 
facta;  omniaque  ad  naturales  causas  referre  (p.  49). 

21 .  Cum  religio  res  naturalis  nequaquam  sit  (alioqui  non  inuenirentur  nationes  omni 
prorsus  religione  carentes;  quales  nostra  aetate  quibusdam  in  loci  inuentae  sunt,  ac  no- 
minatim  in  regione  Brasilia:  quemadmodum  testantur  scriptores  digni  quibus  habea- 
tur  fides,  mihique  constanter  affirmauit  Pistoriensis  quidam  monachus  Franciscanus 
concionator  ex  iis,  quos  Capuccinos  vulgo  vocant,  homo  honesto  loco  natus,  prudens 
admodum  et  cordatus,  qui  in  ea  regione  fiierat)  cum  igitur  religio  nequaquam  res  na- 
turalis sit,  sed,  si  vera  est,  patefactio  sit  quaedam  diuina,  etc.  (p.  42-43).  II  serait  in- 
teressant  d'identifier  ce  Pere  capucin.  Jusqu'ici  je  n'ai  pu  trouver  que  I'indication  suivante 
dans  le  Libro  delle  Deliberazioni  (Province  de  Toscane  des  Capucins),  carton  53:  In  Dei 
nomine  Amen:  Anno  a  natiuitate  Dni  nri  lesu  Christi  1567  indict.^  X,  die  vero  19 
mensis  lanuarii.  —  Patet  cunctis  euidenter  qualiter  hac  die  predicta  venerabiles  ac  re- 
uerendi  sacerdotes  (.  .  .)  et  spectabiles  ac  honorandi  Domini  Officiales  maiores  et  mo- 
demi  Cappitanei  (...)  induxerunt  et  immiserunt,  ac  posuerunt  venerabilem  in  Christo 
patrem,  fratrem  loanem  Portugensem  Hispanum  modernum  priorem  Conuentus  Fra- 
tris  Ordinis  Capuccinorum  in  ciuitate  Pistorii,  in  tenutam  et  corporalem,  realem  et  ac- 
tualem  possessionem  ecclesiae  seu  oratorii  s.  Mariae  et  Marthae  de  Torrichio  Communis 
Uzzani  (cite  par  F.  Sisto  da  Pisa,  Storia  dei  Cappuccini  Toscani,  Firenze,  1906,  p.  113, 
n.  4).  Pour  I'idee  qu'il  existe  un  atheisme  naturel  voir  encore  Socin,  Praelectiones  Theolo- 
gicae,  in  Bibl.  Fratr.  Pol.,  t.I,  p.  537-38. 


JACQUES  CHOMARAT  607 

22.  Ed.  1588,  p.  40-41. 

23.  Lafuma  §  822,  p.  605. 

24.  Ed.  1588,  p.  44-53  et  aussi  62-63. 

25.  Ibid.  p.  55-6. 

26.  Lafuma  §  310. 

27.  Ed.  1588,  p.  59-62  (ed.  1656,  p.  276-277)  depuis  "Nemo  erit,  qui  stultus  non 
censeatur  .  .  ."  jusqu'a  "...  in  ipsa  vita  beatior  censendus,  quam  quisqua  illorum  qui 
ei  non  obediunt." 

28.  Nusquam  infernus,  Diabolum,  seu  Diabolos,  in  Sacris  Uteris  significat  sed  ubique 
(nisi  ego  vehementer  fallor)  statum  et  conditionem  mortuorum;  a  que  ea  differentia, 
quae  est  inter  mori,  et  esse  in  statu  mortuorum,  eadem  non  alia  reuera  est,  inter  mor- 
tem et  infernum,  quod  quidem  attinet  ad  ipsas  Sacras  Literas  (Bibl.  Fr.  Pol.,  t.  I,  p. 
336,  1^  colonne). 

29.  Nee  aliud  malum  ex  primo  illo  delicto  ad  posteros  omnes  necessario  mana  se 
quam  moriendi  omnimodam  necessitatem,  non  quidem  ex  ipsius  delicti  vi,  se  quia  cum 
iam  homo  natura  mortalis  esset,  ob  delictum  illud  suae  naturali  mortalitati  a  Deo  re- 
lictus  est,  quodque  naturale  erat,  id  in  delinquentis  poena  prosrsus  necessarium  est  fac- 
tum. {Praelect.  Theol. ,  in  Bibl.  Fr.  Pol.  t.  I,  p.  541,  1^  colonne).  Si  le  Christ  est  mort 
ce  n'est  point  pour  payer  une  rangon  a  cause  de  nos  peches,  mais  parce  qu'etant  homme 
lui-meme  il  devait  passer  par  la  mort  et  ressusciter  pour  prouver  par  I'exemple  la  verite 
de  sa  promesse  de  vie  eternelle;  il  n'y  a  pas  eu  a  proprement  parler  de  Redemption 
ostenditur,  redemptionem  nostram  per  Christum  factam,  esse  metaphoricam  (De  lesu 
Christo  seruatore,  Pars  Ila,  in  Bibl.  Fr.  Pol.  II,  p.  140). 

30.  Histoire  et  doctrine  sont  liees  etroitement:  non  potest  historia  esse  vera,  quin 
doctrina  quoque  sit  vera  (De  Sacrae  .  .  .  ed.  1588,  p.  62  =  ed.  16p.  277,  1^  colonne). 

31.  La  religion  des  Romains,  peuple  alors  maitre  de  I'univers,  s'est  effondree  de- 
vant  le  christianisme:  contra  vero  ludaeorum  religio  conseruata  est  ac  conseruatur,  et 
ubique  fere,  nisi  ubi  commorari  sit  illis  prorsus  interdictum,  sunt  qui  eam  adhuc  cons- 
tanter  sequuntur;  quamuis  et  hodie,  et  antehac  per  tam  multa  saecula  ii,  qui  eam  pro- 
fitentur,  sint  fuerintque  ludibrio  habiti,  injuriis  affecti,  tyrannice  tractati  atque  oppressi, 
milleque  modis  saepe  non  solum  in  suis  ipsorum  corporibus  vexati  ac  torti,  sed  etiam 
miserabihter  necati.  (1588,  p.  74  =  1656,  p.  277,  1^  colonne).  Cet  argument  (la  perpe- 
tuite)  joint  a  la  negation  de  la  divinite  du  Christ  aurait  entraine  chez  certains  an- 
titrinitaires  polonais  un  retour  au  judai'sme  (Stanislas  Kot,  "Le  mouvement  antitrinitaire 
au  XVI^  et  au  XVIF  siecles,  Humanisme  et  Renaissance,  4,  1937,  p.  112-14).  La  Perpe- 
tuite  chez  Pascal:  T  section,  XXI,  et  11^  section,  IX,  §  454. 

32.  De  Auctoritate,  cap.  V,  ed.  1588,  p.  77  (   =    1656,  p.  280). 

33.  Lafuma  §  236;  plus  etonnant:  "On  n'entend  rien  aux  ouvrages  de  Dieu  si  on 
ne  prend  pour  principe  qu'il  a  voulu  aveugler  les  uns  et  eclaircir  les  autres"  (§  232); 
cela  n'empeche  pas  Pascal  de  maintenir  en  principe  I'affirmation  du  libre-arbitre  de 
I'homme,  comme  le  fait  de  son  c6te  Socin. 

34.  Kot,  art.  cit.  p.  150. 

35.  Stoup,  3f  lettre  sur  la  religion  des  Hollandais,  cite  par  Antoine  Amaud  Apologie  pour 
les  Catholiques,  W  partie  (1682),  Oeuvres,  t.  XIV,  p.  614.  Amaud  parle  plusieurs  fois 
des  Sociniens,  mais  jamais  nommement  de  Fausto,  et  rien  n'indique  s'il  I'avait  lu. 

36.  Le  Lopez  cite  dans  la  kyrielle  de  la  5*^  Provinciale  (Lafuma,  Oeuvres  completes,  p. 
391)  n'est  pas  Domingo,  mais  Antonio  (Pascal,  Oeuvres,  ed.  Les  grands  6crivains  de 
la  France  par  Brunschvcg,  Boutroux  et  Gazier,  t.  IV,  p.  317). 

37.  Kot,  art.  cit.  p.  143-150  et  Ren6  Pintard,  Le  Libertinage  Srudit  dans  la  premiere 
moitie  du  XVIf  siecle,  nouvelle  edition,  1982,  p.  49-50  et  337-38.  Grotius  s6journa 
a  Paris  de  1621  k  1631.  Andre  Wiszowaty,  petit-fils  de  Socin,  s6journa  h  Paris  vers 


6o8  FAUSTO  SOZZINI   SOURCE  DU   PARI  DE  PASCAL? 


1640.  —heDe  Auctoritate  avait  ete  traduit  en  frangais  en  1592  par  Nicolas  Barnaud 
(Graesse,  Tresor  des  livres  rares  et  precieux);  il  m'a  ete  impossible  de  lire  et  meme  de 
localiser  cette  traduction. 

38.  Deja  Mersenne:  "Je  suis  fort  etonne  des  Sociniens  ...  a  peine  peut-on  dire 
qu'ils  sont  chretiens"  — Rivet:  "Vos  deistes,  en  France,  sont  ou  leurs  disciples  ou  leurs 
compagnons."  (1640,  cite  par  Ambroise  Jobert,  De  Luther  a  Mohila,  la  Pologne  dans  la 
crtse  de  la  Chretiente  1517-1648,  Paris,  Institut  d'Etudes  slaves,  1974,  p.  211).  Voltaire: 
"Cette  secte,  quoique  assez  repandue  est  aujourd'hui  aussi  cachee  que  I'etaient  les  pre- 
miers Evangiles.  II  est  d'autant  plus  difficile  de  les  convertir  qu'ils  ne  croient  que  leur 
raison.  Les  autres  chretiens  ne  combattent  contre  eux  que  par  la  voix  sainte  de  I'E- 
criture,  etc."  (Dictionnaire  philosophique,  art.  "Evangile,"  Oeuvres  completes,  Paris,  Firmin- 
Didot,  1858,  t.  VII,  p.  548,  T  colonne);  on  ne  saurait  se  meprendre  davantage  que 
Voltaire  qui  ne  connait  evidemment  pas  le  De  Auctoritate. 

39.  Lafuma  §  131,  p.  515,  2^  colonne,  les  deux  derniers  alineas. 

Bibliographic  elementaire. 

1°  Sur  le  Pari  de  Pascal  (en  excluant  les  etudes  generales  sur  Pascal). 

Jules  Lachelier,  "Notes  sur  le  Pari  de  Pascal,"  Revue  philosophique  de  la  France  et  de 
Vetranger,  1901,  I,  p.  625-39. 

Leon  Blanchet,  "L'attitude  religieuse  des  Jesuites  et  les  sources  du  pari  de  P," 
Revue  de  Metaphysique  et  de  Morale,  t.  26,  1919,  p.  477-516  et  617-47  (voit  la 
source  dans  Sirmond  dont  le  "pari"  est  seulement  un  choix  entre  ciel  et  enfer). 

Jean  Orcibal:  v.  note  10. 

Georges  Brunet,  Le  Pari  de  Pascal,  Preface  de  Jean  Mesnard,  Paris,  Desclee  de 
Brouwer,  1956  (problemes  poses  par  I'etablissement  du  texte). 

Henri  Gouhier,  Blaise  Pascal,  commentaires ,  2^  ed.  Paris,  Vrin,  1971,  ch.  V,  p. 
245-306. 

Per  Lonning:  v.  note  1. 
2°  Sur  Fauste  Socin. 

Pierre  Bayle,  Dictionnaire  historique  et  critique,  "Socin  (Fauste),"  1697  et  1740  (La 
note  M  discute  et  refute  I'accusation  portee  contre  les  Messieurs  de  Port- 
Royal  d'enseigner  la  doctrine  socinienne). 

R.P.  Athanase  Guichard,  Histoire  du  Socinianisme ,  Paris,  1723  (Privilege  du  29 
juillet  1721)  (rapporte  I'opinion  qui  fait  remonter  a  Erasme  les  origines  des 
Sociniens). 

Stanislas  Kot,  art.  cit.  note  31  (P.  16-58  et  94-155). 

Delio  Cantimori,  Eretici  italiani  del  Cinquecento,  Florence,  Sansoni,  1939. 

Depuis  que  cette  communication  a  ete  redigee  mon  collegue  et  ami  Jean-Pierre 
Osier  qui  prepare  un  livre  sur  Socin  et  connait  la  litterature  polonaise  sur  le  sujet 
a  bien  voulu  m'informer  de  la  these  de  L.  Chmaj  selon  qui  le  De  Sacrae  Scripturae  Auc- 
toritate aurait  ete  compose  pour  repondre  a  des  questions  d'Andre  Dudith  (posees 
en  1580);  I'Avis  au  lecteur  de  1611  serait  du  a  I'editeur  et  non  a  Socin,  I'indication 
"il  y  a  quarante  et  quelques  annees"  ne  serait  pas  a  retenir;  Chmaj  renvoie  a  deux 
lettres  de  Socin  adressees  a  Dudith  {B.F.P.  I,  495  2^  col.  et  497  a  501,  2^  col.)  ("Faust 
Socyn,"  Listy,  Varsovie,  1959,  t.  I,  p.  323,  note  2a).  Mais  le  dernier  de  ces  textes  me 
parait  faire  allusion  au  De  Auctoritate  comme  a  une  oeuvre  deja  bien  connue,  non  comme 
a  un  projet  ou  a  une  oeuvre  en  cours;  je  ne  vois  done  pas  de  raison  suffisante  de  met- 
tre  en  doute  ni  I'avant-propos  de  1611  ni  la  Vita  de  1656. 


Strategy  and  Principle 
in  John  Locke's  Epistola  de  Tolerantia 

Robert  Ginsberg 

The  modern  secular  notion  of  religious  toleration  is  the  separation  of 
Church  and  State  whereby  the  secular  authority  does  not  enter  into 
religious  matters.  The  State  remains  aloof  from  religious  doctrine, 
dispute,  and  practice  except  when  the  general  laws  governing  society  are  vi- 
olated. Such  political  toleration  is  indifferent  to  the  identity  and  content  of  re- 
ligions. A  religion  is  tolerated  not  because  it  may  be  right  but  because  its 
adherents  have  the  right  to  worship  as  they  choose.  The  secular  principle  of 
toleration  neither  favors  one  religion  nor  insists  on  the  truth  of  religion.  Hence, 
the  civil  equality  of  nonbelievers  and  diverse  believers  is  respected.  This  lib- 
eral notion  has  had  a  shaky  history  in  the  West. 

John  Locke's  Epistola  de  Tolerantia  [Letter  on  Toleration],  written  in  Latin 
in  the  1680s  during  his  exile  in  Holland  and  published  anonymously  without 
his  knowledge  in  1689  in  Gouda,  is  regarded  as  the  cornerstone  in  the  history 
of  the  liberal  principle.^  Indeed,  Locke  draws  the  line  between  the  civil  and 
the  religious  realms.  Civil  society  is  founded  on  the  voluntary  agreement  to 
establish  institutions  protective  of  the  rights  natural  to  human  beings  in  this 
life  (14-16).  Those  institutions  exercise  power  by  outward  force.  A  Church 
is  also  a  "voluntary  society  of  Men,"  who  agree  upon  a  common  way  of  wor- 
ship, with  the  aim  of  everlasting  life  (22).  Such  volition  and  belief  is  a  matter 
of  conscience,  or  the  inner  persuasion,  and  therefore  lies  outside  the  power 
of  civil  authority.  The  right  of  conscience,  exercised  in  the  religious  realm, 
is  recognized  by  the  political  realm  and  hence  is  not  to  be  interfered  with.  Locke's 
principle  of  separation  also  protects  sects  within  the  religious  world,  for  inter- 
nal disputes  may  not  be  settled  in  violation  of  civil  law  but  are  limited  to  peace- 
ful efforts  at  persuasion.  Locke,  then,  makes  a  beautiful  case  for  peace  among 
religions  in  a  State  and  for  peace  between  a  State  and  religion.  His  Social  Con- 
tract theory  of  society  harmonizes  with  his  account  of  the  holy  aspirations  of 
the  soul:  we  all  need  salvation,  just  as  we  all  need  society. 

While  Locke's  arguments  in  the  Letter,  so  lucidly  and  effectively  expressed, 


6lO  STRATEGY  AND  PRINCIPLE  IN  JOHN   LOCKE 

are  sizable  contributions  to  the  history  of  toleration,  this  study  will  not  focus 
on  the  historical  implications  of  Locke's  work,  but  rather  provide  a  textual  anal- 
ysis of  those  striking  features  in  Locke's  Letter  that  do  not  fit  the  modern  no- 
tion of  toleration  of  which  Locke  is  supposedly  founder.  The  Letter  does  not 
tolerate  atheism.  It  does  not  tolerate  ideas  that  call  for  overturning  established 
social  principles,  even  if  unaccompanied  by  actions.  It  does  not  treat  Jew,  Mos- 
lem, Pagan,  and  Christian  on  an  equal  footing  but  gives  the  preference  to  Chris- 
tianity. It  does  permit  the  civil  authority  to  urge  religious  preference  upon 
citizens,  although  law  and  force  may  not  be  used.  The  Letter  may  be  read 
not  as  an  abstract  argument  which  has  an  agreeable  place  for  Christianity  but 
as  an  identification  of  Christian  principles  from  which  agreeable  abstractions 
flow.  The  principle  of  toleration  here,  then,  is  not  formal  and  secular  but 
grounded  in  a  religious  preference. 

In  retrospect,  these  are  curious  features.  We  might  prefer  not  to  notice  them 
or  else  dismiss  them  as  imperfections  in  a  pioneering  achievement.  But  what 
are  oddities  to  the  modem  philosopher  might  be  central  to  what  Locke  is  doing 
in  the  Letter.  For  Locke  is  not  simply  presenting  a  theory;  he  is  trying  to  win 
over  an  audience.  The  strategy  of  composition  is  an  artful  persuasive  appeal 
to  fellow  Christians  to  act  on  conscience  and  to  discover  the  principles  of  such 
conscientious  action. 

Religious  toleration,  for  Locke,  is  essentially  a  Christian  virtue  (6-8).  The 
true  Christian  is  moved  by  good  will,  love,  and  charity  toward  others.  While 
the  Christian  benevolently  seeks  to  assist  others  toward  the  light  of  salvation, 
that  assistance  cannot  take  the  form  of  force.  The  propagation  of  the  Christian 
faith  must  be  pacifist  so  as  to  keep  faith  with  the  Prince  of  Peace.  Locke  shows 
his  Christian  audience  that  they  must  perforce  be  tolerant.  His  opening  sen- 
tence insists  on  this,  and  his  long  initial  paragraph  has  the  inspired  ring  of 
a  sermon,  replete  with  scriptural  passages,  enumerations,  sharp  contrasts,  and 
rhetoriccil  questions.  And  in  the  subsequent  paragraphs  he  shocks  the  reader 
by  mentioning  abuses  and  absurdities.  Locke  hits  hard  from  the  start,  stres- 
sing both  sides  of  the  coin:  the  tolerance  in  true  Christianity  and  the  unchris- 
tian character  of  intolerance.  Thus,  he  drives  deep  to  the  reader's  Christian 
feeling.  This  is  the  strategy  of  sentiment  in  the  Letter.  The  movement  between 
these  extremes  contributes  to  the  liveliness  of  the  text.  The  diailectic  of 
feelings  —  appealing  to  the  best,  expressing  distaste  at  the  worst  —  dramatizes 
the  reading.  The  initial  paragraphs  have  an  abundant  flow,  the  sentences  rol- 
ling out  to  catch  readers  up  and  carry  them  forward.  At  one  moment  Locke 
speaks  of  piety,  charity,  meekness,  virtue,  salvation,  faith,  love,  friendship, 
kindness,  glory,  and  purity,  while  in  the  next  breath  he  speaks  of  force,  tor- 
ment, lust,  vice,  malice,  corruption,  persecution,  punishment,  maiming,  and 
burning  to  death.  If  the  reader's  conscience  is  awakened,  then  Christianity  must 
be  understood  to  cleave  to  the  former  things  while  abhorring  the  latter. 

Thus,  when  Locke  gets  to  the  philosophic  definitions  and  sets  of  reasons  con- 


ROBERT  GINSBERG  6ll 

ceming  the  civil  realm  and  the  religious  realm,  he  already  has  taken  us  through 
five  pages  of  a  specifically  Christian  context.  In  the  midst  of  the  formal  dis- 
cussion of  the  power  or  subservience  of  a  Church  in  general,  Locke  inserts  con- 
sideration of  Churches  that  worship  Christ.  Then  he  interjects  his  religious 
preference  concerning  the  identity  of  the  Christian  Church  (26-28).  His  in- 
clination is  toward  a  model  of  toleration  —  no  surprise.  Then  Locke  returns 
to  the  more  general  theoretical  discussion.  We  have,  thus,  a  digression,  a  per- 
sonal indulgence.  We  may  read  the  surrounding  theoretical  paragraphs  as  all 
of  a  piece,  while  regarding  this  personal  remark  as  an  aside  or  an  application. 
But  we  may  also  read  the  theoretical  passages  as  extensions  of  that  personzil 
perspective  made  evident  in  the  intervening  paragraph;  we  may  see  the  phi- 
losophy as  springing  from  and  applying  to  a  Christian  worldview.  The  ques- 
tion Locke  has  been  asked  to  respond  to,  signalled  in  the  first  sentence,  is 
toleration  between  Christian  sects.  The  asnswer  is  not  so  much  a  general  the- 
ory of  toleration  applied  to  Christianity  as  it  is  a  working  from  within  the  pro- 
per Christisin  viewpoint  to  sketch  a  general  theory. 

Consider  Locke's  use  of  Jew,  Moslem,  and  Pagan.  They  are  introduced  not 
as  equally  of  concern  in  any  general  theory  but  as  outsiders.  By  examining 
outside  cases,  historically  or  hypothetically,  one  can  make  telling  applications 
to  the  Christian  world.  Thus,  the  Jews  are  offered  as  example  of  how  com- 
mand by  civil  authority  does  not  work  in  matters  spiritual  (50-52).  The  Jews 
would  have  fallen  easily  into  idolatry  if  they  followed  the  religious  dictates  of 
their  many  kings.  The  lesson  Locke  teaches  is  that  adopting  the  religious  pref- 
erence of  one's  ruler  may  lead  one  into  damnable  error,  as  happened  to  those 
Jews  who  worshipped  Baal  at  the  command  of  their  king.  If  the  ancient  Jews 
do  not  look  good  in  this  light,  then  the  contemporary  Christians  must  do  better. 

In  a  second  reference  to  Jews,  Locke  points  out  the  absurdity  of  requiring 
followers  of  that  religion,  who  are  subjects  of  a  Christian  authority,  to  adopt 
the  rite  of  baptism  (58).  But  if  we  see  how  pointless  it  is  to  compel  a  Jew  to 
follow  a  practice  against  that  person's  conscience,  then  we  all  the  more  can 
see  it  is  inappropriate  for  one  kind  of  Christian  to  oblige  another  to  follow  a 
practice  preferred  by  the  ruler.  If  you  wouldn't  do  it  to  a  Jew,  then  you  shouldn't 
do  it  to  a  Christian.  Locke  is  not  denying  toleration  to  Jews;  primarily,  he 
is  making  a  case  for  toleration  among  Christians. 

The  third  Jewish  reference  further  shows  how  something  seemingly  indif- 
ferent, such  as  dress  and  posture,  may  be  rendered  integral  to  worship  by  a 
religion  (62-64).  What  counts  to  the  religion  is  whether  divine  commandment 
made  such  features  crucial  or  whether  they  remain  circumstantial.  The  Chris- 
tian worship,  founded  on  the  Gospel,  does  not  lay  down  as  cruciad  the  circum- 
stances the  Jews  take  to  be  mandated.  From  the  Christian  perspective,  the 
Jewish  practice  remains  odd.  Yet  by  a  Christian  act  of  charity,  the  reader  ac- 
knowledges that  Jews  are  entitled  to  their  peculizir  form  of  worship.  By  exten- 
sion, Christians  of  diverse  denominations  may  follow  their  worship  unmolested. 


6l2  STRATEGY  AND  PRINCIPLE  IN  JOHN   LOCKE 

If  we  allow  the  Jew  to  do  this,  then  we  must  allow  the  Christian  to  do  that. 

A  fourth  reference  is  to  the  Mosaic  Law  forbidding  idolatry  (74-76).  Locke 
argues  this  Law  is  not  binding  on  Christians.  The  Jews  had  a  theocracy  but 
Christians  cannot  have  one.  The  separation  of  Church  and  State,  suggested 
by  the  Gospel,  is  better  than  theocracy,  suggested  by  the  Books  of  Moses.  The 
Jewish  example  shows  it  to  be  unwise  to  accept  a  religious  commandment  as 
a  civil  law.  Jews  did  it,  but  that  is  no  reason  for  Christians  to  do  it. 

Locke  continues  the  discussion  of  Jewish  law  from  another  viewpoint,  for 
the  Jews  did  not  oblige  non-Jews  to  follow  their  law,  nor  did  they  admit  con- 
verts except  voluntarily.  This  admirable  principle  of  toleration  nicely  follows 
the  misguided  principle  of  theocracy.  Locke  had  to  distinguish  the  Christian 
way  from  the  first  Jewish  principle,  but  having  reported  the  second  Jewish  prac- 
tice, he  need  not  make  explicitly  the  Christian  case.  The  implication  is  that 
Christians  too  should  respect  the  freedom  and  conscience  of  those  not  of  their 
sect.  If  the  Jew  could  behave  so,  then  the  Christian  surely  could  do  the  same. 

The  sixth  reference  to  Jews  is  made  a  few  paragraphs  further:  that  Jews  do 
not  accept  the  New  Testament  does  not  affect  anyone's  civil  rights  (78).  Chris- 
tian societies  tolerate  the  presence  of  Jews  whose  limited  religious  belief  does 
not  harm  civil  society.  The  Jewish  case  is  sandwiched  between  two  others:  the 
Roman  Catholic  belief  concerning  transubstantiation  and  the  heathen  disbe- 
lief in  both  Testaments.  In  this  delicate  set  of  cases  what  the  reader  sees  as 
most  objectionable,  the  rejection  of  the  Bible,  is  given  last.  Listed  second  is 
the  regrettable  case  of  the  Jews:  their  error  is  rejection  of  the  Gospel  which 
is  crucial  to  Christians.  But  Jews  are  tolerated  by  Christians;  moreover,  the 
succeeding  religion  may  learn  from  its  "predecessor."  The  first  case,  Cathol- 
icism, is  then  less  objectionable  to  Protestants  when  set  in  this  series.  But  the 
same  point  is  made  in  each  case:  no  matter  how  objectionable  beliefs  may  be 
on  religious  grounds,  they  do  not  cause  harm  to  anyone  in  society;  therefore, 
such  beliefs  ought  not  to  be  interfered  with  by  civil  authority. 

Locke's  last  Jewish  reference  occurs  as  a  subsequent  point  to  his  strong  state- 
ment that  assemblies  of  many  kinds  of  Christian  denominations  must  be  per- 
mitted, assuming  the  assemblies  to  be  peaceable  (102).  If  all  these  kinds  of 
Christians  are  to  be  tolerated,  then,  says  Locke  boldly,  Pagans,  Moslems,  and 
Jews  should  be  accorded  the  same  rights.  The  boldness  of  the  claim  is  increased 
by  listing  first  the  most  objectionable  party  while  mentioning  last  that  party 
we  have  become  accustomed  to  in  the  examples,  the  Jews.  Locke  drops  the 
Moslem  case.  He  points  out  that  we  trade  with  Pagans  and  allow  Jews  to  own 
homes  in  a  Christian  society.  If  civil  status  is  conceded  to  these  parties  then 
permitting  their  religious  practices  can  be  no  harm  to  society.  If  Jews  have 
private  houses  in  which  to  meet,  they  cannot  be  more  a  danger  to  society  when 
meeting  in  public  houses  (synagogues).  The  case  for  Pagans  is  not  pushed. 
Locke  draws  the  lesson  for  Christian  toleration  in  an  effective  rhetorical  ques- 
tion: "Si  haec  Judaeis  et  Ethnicis  concedenda,  pejorne  erit  in  re  publica  Chris- 


ROBERT  GINSBERG  613 

tiana  Christianorum  conditio?"  (102-4).  Locke  puts  the  answer  to  that  ques- 
tion in  the  reader's  mouth:  Christians  are  beset  by  mutual  strife.  Locke's  re- 
joinder is  meant  to  shame  the  audience,  for  this  would  mean  that  Christianity 
is  the  worst  religion  (104).  In  light  of  the  preceding  instances  of  Jews,  to  a  les- 
ser degree  Pagans,  and,  by  mention  only,  Moslems,  the  rejoinder  has  a  clinch- 
ing effect.  As  Locke  boldly  opens  the  door  to  universal  religious  toleration  he 
asks  of  Christians,  are  you  good  enough  to  enter?  In  the  heart  of  the  reader 
the  response  is:  not  only  are  we  Christians  of  diverse  belief  as  good  as  other 
religions,  including  Judaism,  but  we  are  better;  if  others  can  live  in  civil  peace 
together  so  can  we. 

Jews,  then,  are  conveniently  at  hand  for  Locke's  mission  in  stirring  his  Chris- 
tian audience  to  conscientious  response  and  recognition  of  principle.  The  di- 
alogue Locke  contributes  to  is  between  Christian  and  Christian,  not  between 
Christian  and  Jew. 

Locke's  use  of  Moslems  is  more  limited  and  largely  hypothetical,  for  they 
seem  a  distant  people  without  a  heritage  shared  by  Christianity.  The  Jew  is 
the  outsider  in  Christianity's  midst;  the  Moslem  is  the  outsider  who  remains 
outside.  Locke  sketches  the  hypothetical  case  of  two  Christian  Churches  lo- 
cated in  Constantinople  trying  to  dispossess  one  amother  (34-36).  The  Turks 
would  laugh  at  the  cruelty  of  the  Christians:  a  nice  reversal  of  the  Christian 
presumption  of  Turkish  cruelty.  Each  Church  in  the  case  claims  orthodoxy, 
but  such  claims  cannot  ever  be  decisive,  as  Locke  repeatedly  warns,  for  every 
Church  would  be  judge  on  its  own  behalf.  Futhermore,  for  the  Turkish  Em- 
peror to  use  the  power  of  the  State  on  behailf  of  one  of  the  parties  is  absurd. 
We  feel  the  absurdity  which  borders  on  sacrilege.  But  Locke  goes  further.  Not 
only  should  a  Moslem  ruler  refrain  from  intervening  in  matters  of  Christian 
faith,  but  no  ruler  should  intervene  in  matters  of  any  faith:  "Eandem  rationem 
in  Christiano  esse  regno  cogita"  (36). 

The  turning  of  the  tables,  where  Christians  may  dwell  under  Moslem  rule, 
is  again  considered  (70-72).  If  Christian  rulers  may  forcibly  punish  idolatry 
or  other  practices  against  religion,  then  a  Moslem  or  Pagan  prince  may  crush 
Christians.  Since  the  latter  practice  is  offensive,  it  throws  distaste  upon  the 
exercise  of  civil  authority  in  matters  spirituail. 

Locke  does  permit  civil  intervention  in  any  form  of  religion  that  constitutes 
allegiance  to  a  foreign  sovereign.  The  case  he  introduces  as  ridiculous  is  the 
Moslem  who  claims  to  be  subject  of  a  Christian  ruler  yet  gives  obedience  to 
the  Mufti  of  Constantinople  and  thence  to  the  Turkish  Emperor  (90-92).  This 
kind  of  religious  attachment  abroad  in  effect  creates  a  false  political  allegiance 
at  home.  The  fidelity  of  the  Moslem  is  treacherous  to  Christians.  Perhaps  the 
Moslem  is  stupid  in  not  recognizing  the  political  influence  upon  the  Church 
hierarchy.  Presumably  the  relationship  between  Church  and  State  in  Turkey 
is  misguided.  But  whatever  the  Moslem  situation,  a  problem  closer  to  home 
exists  for  Locke's  readers,  for  Catholicism  has  been  accused  of  constituting  po- 


6l4  STRATEGY  AND  PRINCIPLE  IN  JOHN   LOCKE 

litical  allegiance  to  a  sovereign  in  Rome.  Locke  does  not  draw  this  lesson  con- 
cerning Catholicism,  but  it  is  a  sinister  afterthought  to  his  warning  about  mis- 
application of  the  separation  of  Church  and  State. 

In  the  postscript  on  heresy  and  schism,  Locke  illustrates  that  these  terms 
apply  within  a  religion  but  not  between  different  religions,  such  as  Islam  and 
Christianity  (110-12).  The  rule  of  faith  for  Christians  is  the  Bible,  while  for 
the  Moslems  it  is  the  Koran.  Too  bad  Locke  has  not  conjoined  this  passage 
with  others  on  Judaism  and  Christianity  as  grounded  in  scripture;  he  might 
then  have  portrayed  the  three  forms  of  monotheism  as  religions  of  the  Book, 
with  historical  connection  and  spiritual  overlap.  This  sense  of  religious  tol- 
eration as  substantive  community  is  missing  in  the  Letter.  The  growth  of  his- 
tory of  religion  and  of  comparative  religion  will  facilitate  such  an  approach. 
Locke's  point  in  the  present  passage  is  that  even  Christians,  such  as  Catholics 
and  Lutherans,  may  constitute  different  religions,  for  while  they  profess  a  com- 
mon faith  in  Christ  they  may  ground  their  religions  on  different  rules.  The 
implication  is  that  one  such  Christian  religion  cannot  chastise  the  other  for 
heresy  anymore  than  it  can  condemn  the  Moslems  for  that  sin.  And  if  Mos- 
lems and  Christians  may  respect  one  another  as  independent  religions  so  may 
Catholics  and  Protestants.  Thus,  the  obvious  case  of  Moslems  leads  to  a  fine 
distinction  concerning  Christians. 

Atheism  cannot  be  tolerated  because  it  undermines  all  religion  (92).  Locke's 
argument  springs  from  the  religious  viewpoint;  the  aim  is  to  preserve  religion. 
Religion  is  endangered  from  within  by  intolerance  between  Christians,  from 
without  by  political  intervention  and  by  atheistic  denial.  Atheism  is  doubly 
dangerous  because  it  also  undermines  the  civil  society,  since  without  God,  "pro- 
mises, covenants,  and  oaths"  are  not  binding.  The  commitment  to  God  is  the 
cornerstone  to  human  actions  that  create  the  State  and  sustain  it.  Locke's  brief 
case  against  atheism,  a  mere  paragraph,  is  disappointing  to  the  modern  sec- 
ular theorist  who  looks  at  religious  toleration  from  outside  the  religous  view- 
point but  from  inside  the  perspective  of  the  political  realm  separated  from  the 
Church.  The  content  of  religious  belief  or  disbelief  is  indifferent  to  such  a  the- 
orist, and  no  belief  in  God  must  be  equally  protected.  The  state  may  be  founded 
on  principles  of  reason  or  practicality  that  need  no  divine  commitment.  Fi- 
nally, atheism  as  a  way  of  thought  is  not  inherently  a  destroyer  of  religion  — 
unless  such  religion  is  of  weak  faith.  While  Locke's  commitment  to  divine  foun- 
dations of  polity  is  strong,  we  may  also  understand  this  paragraph  by  keeping 
in  mind  that  he  is  writing  for  a  Christian  audience  concerned  to  protect  the 
true  religion.  Protection  of  the  false  atheism  does  not  appeal  to  their  conscience. 
Moreover,  the  protection  of  other  religions,  including  other  Christian  Churches, 
need  not  entail  the  nastiness  of  harboring  atheism.  In  the  case  of  the  multi- 
plicity of  religions,  the  relativity  of  the  claim  of  orthodoxy  and  divine  guidance 
baffles  any  resolution  of  their  differences,  though  admonitions  may  be  tried. 
But  in  the  case  of  atheism  this  relativity  is  blasted  and  everyone  will  lose 


ROBERT  GINSBERG  615 

out  in  the  undermining.  From  the  secular  point  of  view,  Locke  has  misjudged 
the  power  of  expression  of  thought  to  destroy  social  bonds  or  other  modes  of 
thought,  while  from  the  religious  side,  Locke's  Christian  charity  stops  short 
at  atheists. 

The  fear  of  thinking  as  undermining  political  structure  led  Locke  to  ban 
views:  "Nulla  dogmata,  humanae  societati  vel  bonis  moribus  ad  societatem  ci- 
vilem  conservandam  necessariis  adversa  et  contraria,  a  magistratu  sunt  tole- 
randa"  (88).  Locke's  failure  is  to  draw  a  distinction  between  the  expression  of 
antisocial  thought  and  the  inciting  or  doing  of  antisocial  acts.  Moreover,  there 
may  be  a  difference  of  opinion  over  the  proper  principles  of  the  society  or  State. 
In  the  relativity  of  opinion,  like  that  of  religion,  the  State  cannot  be  decisive. 
Locke's  rejoinder  is  that  noxious  ideas,  of  which  atheism  is  example,  are  banned 
primarily  because  of  their  deleterious  effect  on  what  must  be  protected  in  so- 
ciety. If  we  are  to  be  tolerant,  we  must  not  tolerate  such  ideas.  But  Locke  weak- 
ens his  case  for  religious  toleration  by  allowing  the  State  to  sit  in  judgment 
over  ideas. 

He  allows  the  State  more  than  that.  It  may  actively  seek  to  persuade,  by 
nonviolent  means,  persons  who  do  not  follow  the  faith  of  the  ruler  (18-20). 
The  ruler  may  not  use  force  of  law  in  this  effort.  Locke  wins  two  points  in 
this  concession:  (1)  he  illustrates  that  Christian  charity,  even  at  the  level  of 
the  ruler,  is  persuasive  rather  than  coercive,  and  (2)  he  urges  that  the  State 
must  not  intervene  politically  in  relgious  matters.  The  ruler  has  a  right  and 
a  duty  to  enter  the  moral  and  spiritual  dialogue.  Thus,  Locke's  Christian  read- 
ers are  assured  that  the  ruler  of  a  Christian  country  need  not  be  silent  on  mat- 
ters of  religion  while  observing  the  duty  of  religious  toleration.  We  have  our 
cake  and  eat  it  too. 

From  the  secular  point  of  view  Locke  has  conceded  too  much  power  over 
teaching  and  expression  of  opinion  to  the  State.  The  State  has  a  chilling  effect 
upon  the  debate  when  it  takes  sides.  The  Lockean  positive  intervention  of  au- 
thority is  by  persuasion  only,  but  the  negative  side  is  the  banning  of  opinion 
by  law.  The  danger  is  that  unchecked  zeal  in  pursuing  the  positive  will  lead 
to  increased  use  of  the  negative  such  that  the  State  will  govern  matters  of  con- 
science. Locke's  fear  is  that  the  life  of  conscience  will  become  hopelessly  mud- 
dled or  corrupted,  given  widespread  dispute  in  religion,  unless  protection  is 
offered  by  the  State.  The  Lockean  State  is  not  as  neutral  a  political  body  as 
we  moderns  wish  in  matters  of  opinion  and  conscience.  A  helpful  distinction 
would  be  that  the  ruler's  expressed  preference  as  an  individual  is  separate  from 
that  as  a  holder  of  an  office. 

Locke  fails  to  work  out  the  modern  secular  notion  of  religious  toleration, 
that  is,  my  notion,  which  would  protect  me  better  than  his.  Genuine  theore- 
tical differences  arise  between  us  over  the  role  of  ideas  in  public  life  and  the 
grounding  commitments  for  polity.  His  solid  theoretical  contribution  needs 
some  changing.  But  Locke's  case  in  the  Letter  is  shaped  to  appear  to  its  Chris- 


6l6  STRATEGY  AND  PRINCIPLE  IN  JOHN   LOCKE 

tian  readership  as  a  brilliantly  faultless  plea,  a  work  of  admonition,  teaching, 
and  persuasion,  that  springs  from  Christian  virtue.  Locke  has  aroused  con- 
science by  his  craft  as  writer  in  making  remarks  upon  Jews,  Moslems,  Pa- 
gans, and  atheists.  His  awakening  of  the  sense  of  toleration  curiously  depends 
upon  the  intolerEince  persistent  in  the  European  understanding. 

The  Pennsylvania  State  University, 
Delaware  County  Campus 


Note 


1 .  The  text  I  have  used  is  the  edition  in  Latin  and  English  by  Mario  Montuori  (The 
Hague:  Martinus  Nijhoff,  1963).  Page  references  to  the  Latin  are  inserted  parenthet- 
ically in  my  text. 


Enlightened  Thought  in  Diego  Jose  Abad's 
De  Deo,  Deoque  Homine  Heroica 

Arnold  L.  Kerson 


Diego  Jose  Abad,  Jesuit  humanist,  teacher  of  philosophy,  theology, 
and  law,  and  highly  regarded  Latin  poet,  ranks  with  his  fellow  Jes- 
uits, Francisco  Javier  Alegre  and  Rafael  Landivar,  as  one  of  the 
most  important  Mexican  Latinists  of  the  eighteenth  century.  He  participated 
significantly  in  a  movement  for  cultural  renewal,  an  important  aspect  of  which 
included  a  reform  of  the  plan  of  studies  of  the  Jesuit  Order  in  Mexico,  with 
a  view  toward  providing  a  greater  role  for  modern  science  and  philosophy. 
Abad  and  Alegre,  together  with  Francisco  Javier  Clavijero,  are  considered  the 
"idealogues"  of  this  reform  movement.  Abad  also  made  a  modest  contribution 
to  the  intellectual  movement  of  the  Spanish  and  Spanish- American  Jesuits  ex- 
iled by  the  1767  decree  of  Charles  III.  The  number  and  variety  of  Abad's  works, 
both  in  manuscript  and  published  form,  reveal  an  enlightened  humanist  with 
tendencies  toward  universality.  They  deal  with  theology,  philosophy,  law,  math- 
ematics, geometry,  literary  motifs,  and  other  assorted  topics.  As  a  humanist 
who  gave  his  classes  in  Latin,  the  greater  portion  of  his  works  are  written  in 
that  language. 

The  main  source  of  information  on  the  life  of  Abad  is  the  biographical  essay 
in  Latin,  which,  under  the  title  of  "Specimen  vitae  auctoris,"  the  Mexican  Jes- 
uit humanist  Manuel  Fabri  composed  for  his  edition  of  Abad's  principal  work, 
the  hexameter  poem  De  Deo,  Deoque  Homine  Heroica}  Born  in  Jiquilpan,  in  the 
province  of  Michoacan,  June  1,  1727,  Abad  studied  Latin,  rhetoric,  and  po- 
etics, and  began  philosophy  at  the  Jesuit  Colegio  de  San  Ildefonso,  in  Mexico 
City.  He  sought  admission  to  the  Company  of  Jesus  at  the  age  of  fourteen, 
and  entered  the  Colegio-Noviciado  of  Tepotzotlan  in  1741.  There  he  devoted 
himself  to  the  serious  study  of  the  classical  Latin  authors,  and  developed  his 
ability  to  write  in  Latin.  He  went  on  to  study  philosophy  and  theology,  per- 
forming brilliantly  in  these  subjects.  Abad  came  under  the  influence  of  Jose 
Rafael  Campoy,  possibly  the  most  liberal  and  enlightened  of  Mexican  Jesuits 
at  that  time,  and  a  major  figure  in  the  alluded  to  movement  begun  in  1763 
to  reform  the  plan  of  studies  of  the  Jesuit  Order  in  New  Spain. 


6l8  ABAD's   DE   DEO,   DEOQUE  HOMINE  HEROIC  A 

Abad  held  a  prestigious  post  as  teacher  of  philosophy  at  the  Colegio  Maximo 
de  San  Pedro  y  San  Pablo.  Here  he  combined  traditional  scholastic  philos- 
ophy, purified  as  much  as  possible  of  the  abuses  that  discredited  it,  with  the 
advanced  practices  of  modern  philosophy.  He  later  assumed  an  even  more  pres- 
tigious position,  that  of  Prefecto,  or  Director,  in  the  Colegio  de  San  Ildefonso, 
of  the  Academies  of  theology  and  civil  and  canon  law.  But  the  burdens  of  nu- 
merous duties  affected  his  health,  according  to  his  biographer,  and  consequently 
his  superiors  sent  him  to  the  Seminario  de  San  Francisco  de  Queretaro,  where 
he  served  as  director  and  professor.  A  lighter  schedule  permitted  him  to  work 
on  several  projects  that  involved  Latin  poetry.  Abad  remained  at  Queretaro 
for  four  years  until  1767,  the  date  of  the  expulsion.  He  eventually  took  up  fmal 
residence  in  Ferrara,  where,  limited  in  his  activity  by  poor  health,  he  devoted 
himself  to  the  revision,  amplification,  and  publication  of  the  De  Deo.  Besides 
this,  he  published  the  Dissertatio  ludicro-seria,  a  thirty-page  satirical  work  in  prose, 
which  refutes  a  notion,  currently  held  at  the  time,  that  only  Italians  are  ca- 
pable of  writing  correct  Latin. ^  It  is  not  known  whether  he  was  engaged  in 
teaching  or  any  other  occupation.  In  1778,  in  search  of  a  better  climate  for 
his  health,  he  moved  to  Bologna,  where  he  died  on  September  30,  1779. 

Father  Fabri  was  the  first  to  make  mention  of  the  De  Deo.  The  primitive 
form  of  the  poem  appeared  in  Cadiz,  Spain,  in  1769,  in  an  unauthorized  edi- 
tion, prepared  by  the  famous  Mexican  philosopher  and  figure  of  the  Enlight- 
enment, Juan  Benito  Diaz  de  Gamarra,  under  the  title  of  Musa  americana.  No 
data  have  been  uncovered  to  explain  how  Gamarra  obtained  the  nineteen  cantos 
of  the  Musa  americana.  This  "pirated"  publication  prompted  the  author  to  pre- 
pare two  successive  editions,  corrected  and  enlarged,  which  were  published 
in  Venice  (1773)  and  Ferrara  (1775),  under  the  respective  titles  oi  De  Deo  He- 
roica,  Carmen  Deo  nostro,  and  De  Deo,  Deoque  Homine  Heroica,  and  which  elicited 
the  enthusiasm  of  even  the  most  demanding  Italian  Latinists.  This  favorable 
reception  encouraged  the  poet  to  work  on  a  new  edition.  Abad,  however,  died 
before  the  work  was  finished,  whereupon  his  good  friend,  Manuel  Fabri,  uti- 
lizing all  the  material  that  the  poet  had  assembled,  brought  this  edition  to  its 
successful  completion.  Known  as  the  Cesena  edition  of  1780,  it  is  considered 
the  definitive  one.^  The  title  had  undergone  several  changes,  until  it  finally 
crystallized  into  De  Deo,  Deoque  Homine  Heroica,  a  correct  translation  of  which 
might  be  "Epic  Songs  on  the  Humanity  and  Divinity  of  God."  This  long  poem 
of  forty-three  cantos,  or  carmina,  is  divided  into  two  parts;  the  first  concerns 
the  attributes  of  God  in  general;  the  second  part,  derived  basically  from  the 
New  Testament,  is  a  retelling  of  the  story  of  Christ.  Of  particular  interest  are 
the  digressions  and  allusions  to  varied  topics,  many  of  which  reflect  the  sci- 
entific and  enlightened  background  of  the  author. 

As  a  teacher  of  philosophy  Abad  prepared  class  lecture  notes  which,  in  keep- 
ing with  the  practice  of  the  times,  were  known  as  the  Cursus  Philosophicus .  Pre- 
served virtually  intact  in  manuscript  form,  it  reveals  Abad  to  be  what  he  was. 


ARNOLD   L.    KERSON  619 

fundamentally  a  scholastic  philosopher.  In  spite  of  this,  he  seems  well  informed 
on  modern  philosophy,  and  sympathizes  with  aspects  of  it  that  do  not  conflict 
with  his  religious  principles.  The  university  theses  written  in  Latin  in  New 
Spain  between  1750  and  1810  show  a  clear  tendency  toward  experimentalism, 
and  the  research  of  Monelisa  Perez-Marchand  reveals  that  the  works  of  such 
figures  as  Descartes,  Newton,  Leibniz,  Voltaire,  Rousseau,  Condillac,  d'A- 
lembert,  Raynal,  and  others,  circulated  and  were  well  known  in  the  Spanish 
American  colonies.'^  Perez-Marchand  says  that  intellectuals  of  the  caliber  of 
Francisco  Javier  Clavijero,  Francisco  Javier  Alegre,  and  Juan  Benito  Diaz  de 
Gamarra,  among  others,  accepted  the  new  ideological  and  socio-political  orien- 
tations that  were  compatible  with  Catholic  orthodoxy.  Abad  read  carefully  De- 
scartes and  Pierre  Gassendi,  as  his  Cursus  Philosophtcus  makes  clear,  and 
doubtlessly  knew  the  writings  of  the  Spanish  Benedictine  encyclopedist,  Ben- 
ito Jeronimo  Feijoo,  an  apt  model  indeed  for  Abad.^ 

In  this  brief  study  we  are  concerned  specifically  with  the  manifestation  of 
enlightened  thought  in  the  De  Deo.  It  is  true  that  in  several  places  throughout 
the  poem  Abad  reproaches  particularly  the  French  philosophes ,  without  ever  men- 
tioning names,  mainly  for  their  "hostile"  attitude  toward  traditional  religion. 
Dramatic  is  the  following  image  which  portrays  Religion  as  a  shackled,  down- 
cast prisoner,  taunted  and  vilified  by  philosophes,  who  drown  out  the  laments 
of  the  faithful.  A  philosophe,  we  are  told,  is  worse  than  a  mother  who  kills  her 
own  child. 

.  .  .  Qui  Philosophos  se  nomine  dicunt, 

mirum  quo  iam  prorumpant.  Sanctissima  quaeque 

erradicare,  et  convellere  dogmata  tentant 

insani:  novi  et  Enceladi,^  novi  ubique  Typhoei^ 

sacrilegos  armant  calamos  in  sancta,  Deumque. 

En  deiecta  oculos,  vultus  deiecta  decoros, 

nuda  pedes,  trahitur  manibus  post  terga  revinctis 

Relligio,  portans  immania  vincula  collo, 

inter  clamores  sceleratos.  Impia  turba 

it  circum  captae  insultans,  iteransque  cachinnos: 

nee  sinit,  audiri  gemitus,  luctusque  Piorum. 

(Patientia,  12.37-47) 

It  is  amazing  to  what  lengths  those  who  call  themselves  Philosophers  will 
go.  They  madly  attempt  to  destroy  and  undermine  all  dogma.  New  En- 
celadi  and  Typhoei  everywhere  poise  their  sacriligious  pens  against  God 
and  all  that  is  holy.  Behold  Religion,  her  eyes  downcast,  her  beautiful 
face  afflicted,  her  hands  tied  behind  her  back,  her  neck  bearing  heavy 
chains,  is  dragged  along,  barefoot,  amidst  sinful  shouts.  The  impious 
throng  crowds  around  the  captive,  insulting  and  repeatedly  jeering  her, 
nor  does  it  sdlow  the  groans  and  weeping  of  the  faithful  to  be  heard. 


620  ABAD's   DE  DEO,    DEOQUE  HOMINE  HEROICA 

As  a  man  of  science,  Abad  cannot  justify  such  unscientific  acts  as  the  Church's 
denunciation  in  the  seventeenth  century  of  the  Copernican  system.  In  Car- 
men 9,  Sapientia,  he  refers  to  various  theories  relating  to  the  universe,  as  well 
as  to  the  nature  and  shape  of  the  earth,  which  were  held  true  in  the  past  and 
later  disproven.  He  explains  that  men  are  very  prone  to  error  in  such  complex 
matters,  while  God  alone  knows  the  secret  of  the  sustenance  of  the  universe. 
In  truth, 

Quantumcumque  bonis,  nostris  si  legibus  iret 
orbis,  iam  fessus  pridem,  fractusque  ruisset. 

(52-53) 
If  Earth  were  to  function  according  to  man's  laws,  no  matter  how  good  they 
might  be,  weary  and  shattered,  it  would  have  broken  apart  long  ago. 

However,  if  man  does  not  do  so  well  with  theories,  in  practical,  technical 
matters,  he  shows  his  superiority,  thanks  to  the  ingenium  that  God  has  bestowed 
upon  him.  He  can,  with  his  knowledge  of  botany,  create  new  forms  of  plants 
and  trees.  He  can  quarry  marble,  mine  copper,  silver,  and  gold,  divert  the 
course  of  rivers,  dredge  lakes,  construct  breakwaters,  and  navigate  long  ocean 
voyages  (Beneficentia,  6).  It  is  obvious  that  these  activities  were  vital  to  the 
economic  well-being  of  colonial  New  Spain. 

Reminiscent  of  the  encyclopedist.  Father  Feijoo,  cited  above,  in  his  essay 
against  superstition,  "Profecias  supuestas,"^  Abad,  in  Carmen  21,  Annuntians 
Futura,  refers  to  the  false  prophesying  based  on  the  examination  of  the  en- 
trails of  animals,  the  study  of  the  flights  and  songs  of  birds,  the  position  of 
heavenly  bodies,  the  lines  and  configurations  of  the  human  hand,  dreams,  and 
the  like.  The  religions  of  Greece  and  Rome  relied  on  such  false  soothsaying. 
Abad  is  astonished  that 

Roma  orbis  domina  expectabat,  ut  arma  moveret, 
educti  cavea  puUi  pultemne  vorarent? 

(22-23) 

Rome,  the  mistress  of  the  world,  before  taking  up  arms,  waited  to  see 
whether  the  sacred  chickens  would  eat  the  sacred  feed. 

The  enlightened  mind,  of  course,  rejects  all  such  superstition. 

It  is,  however,  in  Carmen  18,  Deus  Scientiarum,  where  we  find  a  concen- 
tration of  Abad's  Enlightenment  ideas.  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  Enrique 
Villaseiior  omits  precisely  this  canto  from  his  translation  of  the  De  Deo.  He 
explains  why: 

.  .  .  lo  omiti  por  razon  de  que  todo  el  es  una  especie  de  extracto  de  los 
escasos  conocimientos  que  en  las  ciencias  naturales  poseia  el  siglo  de  nues- 
tro  autor,  quien  en  dicho  canto  pondera  como  grandes  inventos,  cosas 
que  en  este  nuestro  que  parece  haberle  arrancado  todos  sus  secretos  a 


ARNOLD   L.    KERSON  62I 

la  naturaleza,  se  ven  ya  con  cierta  indiferencia  que  casi  raya  en  despre- 


9 


Villasenor  was  apparendy  not  impressed  by  Abad's  poetic  exaltation  of  the 
human  intellect.  Carmen  18  in  reality  represents  a  logical  high  point  in  the 
poem's  progression;  of  all  the  creations  of  God,  man's  "genius"  stands  out  as 
His  greatest  achievement.  This  canto  begins  with  a  rationalist's  denunciation 
of  war.  It  is  true  that  strife  and  conflict  are  found  among  all  living  creatures, 
on  land,  in  the  sea,  and  in  the  air.  With  scientific  perception,  Abad  antici- 
pates the  Darwinian  life-struggle: 

Proelio  item  viles  vel  Musca,  et  Aranea  certant, 
insidiisque,  at  que  oblongis  per  mutua  nexis 
cruribus,  enixe,  et  valide  luctantur  utrinque. 
Bella  gerunt  itidem  medio  vel  in  aequore  Pisces, 
quamquam  sunt  adeo  stolidi,  manibusque  carentes, 
voceque.  Magna  ubivis,  per  terras,  aera,  pontum, 
quadrupedum  cernas,  volucrumque,  et  bella  natantum. 

(31-37) 

Likewise,  even  the  insignificant  fly  and  spider  engage  in  deceitful  battle, 
and  with  their  long  legs  all  tangled  up,  both  ze2dously  and  ferociously 
fight.  In  like  manner,  even  fish  wage  war  in  the  depths  of  the  sea,  al- 
though they  are  quite  brutish,  lacking  hands  and  language.  Wherever 
you  go,  on  land,  in  the  air,  on  the  sea,  you  will  see  the  struggle  of  beasts, 
flying  creatures,  and  denizens  of  the  sea. 

The  development  of  the  intellect  and  the  pursuit  of  knowledge  are  of  far  greater 
benefit  than  war.  The  human  mind  and  the  technological  achievement  of  which 
it  is  capable,  is  exalted  in  these  enthusiastic  lines: 

Ingenium,  et  doctas  mentem  excoluisse  per  artes 
hoc  demum  est  aliquid.  Nam  vi,  validisque  lacertis 
praestat  Equus,  praestant  Taurus,  Leo,  Tigris,  et  Ursus. 
Vincimus  ingenio  tamen,  exsuperamus  et  omnes 
Squamigerum,  Alituumque  acies,  turbasque  ferarum. 
Arte  magistra,  igne,  incude,  unca  et  forcipe  ferrum 
versamus:  supplet  vires  industria:  et  armis, 
cuspideque  instructis  telis,  hastilibus,  hamis, 
quae  parat  Ars,  portentosa,  atque  immania  Cete 
confodimus,  vastamque  abducimus  aequore  praedam. 

(40-49) 

To  cultivate  native  talent  and  the  mind  through  education  is  wonder- 
ful indeed.  For  by  sheer  brute  force  the  horse,  the  bull,  the  lion,  the  tiger, 
and  bear  excel  Man.  Yet  we,  by  our  wits,  excel  2ill  species  offish,  birds, 


622  ABAD's  DE  DEO,   DEOQUE  HOMINE  HEROICA 

and  wild  animals.  Through  the  aid  of  science,  we  forge  iron  with  fire, 
anvil,  hammer,  and  tongs.  Application  makes  up  for  strength.  With 
equipment,  spears,  harpoons,  and  hooks,  which  skill  provides,  we  catch 
amazingly  huge  whales,  and  we  take  from  the  sea  immense  booty. 

Wisdom,  knowledge,  art,  all  come  from  God.  Enlightenment  is  truly  the 
greatest  gift: 

Nil  boni  habes,  montes  quamvis  congesseris  auri; 
si  tibi  lux  animo  nulla  est,  mentemque  profundae 
desidiosam,  ignavamque  obsedere  tenebrae. 

(64-66) 

No  matter  how  many  heaps  of  gold  you  may  have  piled  up,  you  will  have 
nothing  of  value  if  your  soul  is  not  enlightened,  and  profound  darkness 
has  taken  over  an  idle  and  slothful  mind. 

Abad  enumerates  proudly  the  human  achievements  of  language  and  its  sub- 
tleties, dialects,  metaphysics,  geometry,  algebra,  mechanics,  and  hydraulics. 
Man,  with  his  knowledge  of  mechanics,  can  solve  the  problem  of  weights  and 
balances,  for  exaimple,  as  well  as  dislodge  a  ship  which  strong  winds  keep  for- 
cing back  to  port.  The  marvelous  hydraulic  machine  produces  magical  effects 
as  it  carries  out  its  task  with  ease: 

Et  quanto  est  magis  ingeniosum  avertere  fundo, 
vastasque,  et  pigras  cochleis  siccare  paludes? 
At  facit  hoc,  facit  ultra  Hydraulica  machina  passim 
surgere  aquam  sursum,  et  valido  prorumpere  in  auras 
impete,  et  assiduo  saltu,  ludoque  micare: 
tamquam  oblita  sui,  tamquam  esset  ponderis  expers. 

(152-57) 

And  how  very  ingenious  it  is  to  remove  immense  quantities  of  stagant 
water  from  swamps  and  dry  them  out  with  waterscrews.  The  hydraulic 
machine  does  this,  and  in  addition,  it  makes  the  water  rise  up  here  and 
there,  burst  into  the  air  with  great  force,  and  splash  about  with  constant 
leaping  and  frolicking,  as  if  it  forgot  itself,  as  if  it  had  no  weight. 

There  are  references  to  prisms,  the  magnet,  the  making  of  gunpowder,  chro- 
nography,  the  usefulness  of  astronomy  for  navigational  purposes,  the  com- 
pass, medicine  and  curative  herbs  and  minerals.  The  poet  praises  artisans  who 
work  with  bronze,  silver,  and  gold,  as  well  as  weavers  of  fine  woolens  and  lin- 
ens. And  finally,  Abad  touches  upon  the  subjects  of  theology,  justice,  and  law. 
Theology,  that  is  to  say,  the  sacred  books,  can  be  understood  only  by  properly 
qualified  individuals.  Certainly  not  by  ancient  and  modern  Philosophi,  who  de- 
lirant.  As  for  legislators,  Man  is  quite  inadequate.  Witness  the  example  of  Lie- 


ARNOLD   L.    KERSON  623 

urgus,  who  not  only  decreed  that  young  people  dance  naked,  but  went  so  far 
as  to  allow  even  robbery.  Only  laws  that  harmonize  with  God's  will  are  just. 
"Quae  non  divina  est,  fert  legum  latio  mortem"  (323).  Abad  adds  that  both 
the  legislators  of  the  past,  along  with  contemporary  philosophers,  and  here  is 
another  dig  at  the  encyclopedists,  are  a  scandalous,  incompetent  lot.  Carmen 
18  ends  with  a  tribute  to  poetry,  undeniably  one  of  the  greatest  human  achieve- 
ments. 

In  conclusion,  Abad's  fundamental  aim  in  the  De  Deo  is  to  instill  in  the  reader 
a  love  for  God  and  the  Christian  religion,  and  he  seeks  to  achieve  this  with 
carefully  constructed,  elegant,  and  often  very  colorful  and  animated  Latin  hex- 
ameters. The  number  of  themes  dealt  with  in  the  poem  is  great  indeed.  As 
a  teacher  who  expounded  upon  and  incorporated  certain  aspects  of  modern 
philosophy,  and  was  strongly  inclined  toward  modern  or  experimental  phys- 
ics, Abad,  along  with  a  number  of  his  Jesuit  comrades,  is  a  kind  of  eclectic 
who  in  Mexico  bridges  the  gap  between  scholasticism  and  modernity.  The  De 
Deo,  as  we  have  tried  to  show,  with  its  positive  references  to  the  physical  scien- 
ces and  the  need  for  education  and  the  development  of  mental  acumen  and 
"equilibrium,"  reveals  clearly  the  enlightened  aspect  of  Abad's  thinking. 

Trinity  College,  Hartford 


Notes 


1.  Editio  tertia  postuma  (Caesenae,  1780),  pp.  xvii-xxxv.  The  "Specimen"  also  ap- 
pears in  the  Cesena  edition  of  1793,  a  virtual  reprinting  of  the  1780  edition,  pp.  10-22. 
Bernabe  Navarro  has  translated  this  biography  into  Spanish  in  Vidas  de  mexicanos  ilus- 
tres  del  siglo  XVIII  {Mexico:  Universidad  Nacional  Autonoma  de  Mexico,  1956),  pp. 
181-210.  Benjamin  Fernandez  Valenzuela  has  also  translated  it  into  Spanish  in  his 
bilingual  edition  of  the  complete  version  of  the  De  Deo:  Diego  Jose  Abad.  Poemo  heroico. 
Introduccion,  version  y  aparato  critico  de  Benjamin  Fernandez  Valenzuela  (Mexico: 
Universidad  Nacional  Autonoma  de  Mexico:  1974),  pp.  70-95.  Quotations  from  the 
De  Deo  are  from  the  Fernandez  Valenzuela  edition.  The  translations  into  English  are 
mine. 

2.  N.p.,  1778. 

3.  See  note  1  above. 

4.  Dos  etapas  ideologicas  del  siglo  XVIII  en  Mexico  (Mexico:  El  Colegio  de  Mexico,  1945). 

5.  Bernabe  Navarro  analyzes  Abad's  Cursus  Philosophicus  in  La  introduccion  de  lafilosojta 
moderna  en  Mexico  (Mexico:  El  Colegio  de  Mexico,  1948),  pp.  150-74. 

6.  Enceladus:  a  giant  imprisoned  by  Zeus  under  Aetna. 

7.  Typhoeus:  a  monster  subdued  by  Zeus. 

8.  In  Feijoo,  Teatro  crttico  universal,  ed.  by  Agustin  Millares  Carlo  (Madrid:  Espasa- 
Calpe,  1968),  1:233-64. 

9.  Cantos  epicos  a  la  divinidady  humanidad  de  Dios  (Mexico:  Herrero,  Hermanos,  1896), 
p.  16. 


Leibniz's  Theory  of  Order 

Paul  Grimley  Kuntz 

Leibniz's  metaphysics  has  suffered  many  misfortunes  that  scholarship 
is  still  trying  to  repair.  First  the  author  never  took  or  was  never  af- 
forded the  leisure  of  an  adequate  statement  of  his  complete  system; 
we  must  now  rely  on  a  number  of  fragments  so  vast  that  a  complete  edition 
of  the  philosopher/mathematician's  works  remains  3n  undertaking  in  the  dis- 
tant future.  Some  of  his  pieces  are  still  available  only  in  obscure  editions,  and 
the  interpretations  of  these  are  as  various  as  the  editors. 

The  second  difficulty  is  that  Leibniz's  metaphysics  is  based  upon  short  state- 
ments that  shift  in  emphasis.  Thus  certain  loosely  connected  fragments  have 
made  him  famous  as  the  philosopher  of  pre-established  harmony,  of  mono- 
dology,  and  of  perfect  divine  justice  or  theodicy.  Thus  he  is  presented  in  the 
textbooks,  and  hence  derives  his  reputation  as  the  author  of  a  peculiar  com- 
bination of  extreme  dogmas.  Many  an  examination  has  been  passed  by  re- 
peating that  his  God  is  the  watchmaker  who  sets  the  cosmic  clocks  going  so 
that  they  run  synchronously;  that  each  substance  is  a  windowless  monad,  de- 
pendent only  on  the  chief  Monad,  God,  yet  mirroring  all  the  cosmos  from  its 
singular  point  of  view;  that  the  world  process  is  so  perfectly  governed  that  no- 
thing could  be  improved.  Can  the  intelligent  layman  be  blamed  for  ignoring 
a  metaphysician  so  blind  to  disharmonies  between  mind  and  body,  between 
man  and  nature,  mind  and  mind,  society  and  society  — and  a  man  so  ignorant 
of  causal  interconnections?  Finally  is  he  not  a  man  so  insensitive  to  unrequited 
love  and  unpunished  crime  that  even  a  Candide  must  ultimately  turn  from 
Pangloss's  optimism?  Leibniz's  ideological  system  has  been  made  to  sound  so 
extreme  and  eccentric  that  it  seems  incomprehensible  that  he  could  have  also 
been  a  great  mathematician  and  logician.  One  theory,  that  of  Bertrand  Rus- 
sell, claims  that  there  is  no  philosophical  connection  between  Leibniz's  meta- 
physics and  his  logic,  so  that  one  should  attend  only  to  the  latter  since  in 
presenting  the  former  he  is  obviously,  according  to  Russell,  beyond  his  depth! 
Yet  Leibniz  was  the  most  eclectic  of  all  great  modern  philosophers,  one  who 


626  Leibniz's  theory  of  order 

could  find  something  in  every  great  system.  Therefore,  he  seems  most  authen- 
tic when  professing  his  fundamental  commitment  to  harmony  as  the  central 
principle  of  the  cosmos.  The  divine  harmony  is  also  a  model  for  humankind. 
As  the  various  aspects  of  his  metaphysics  developed,  harmony  is  found  related 
to  every  particular  theory.  Hence,  although  his  work  is  labyrinthine,  the  har- 
mony it  provides  us  with  serves  as  a  thread  of  Ariadne.^ 

Leibniz's  definition  of  harmony  occurs  in  one  of  his  earliest  writings,  a  di- 
alogue expressing  the  philosopher's  faith,  Confessio  Philosophi,  (1673),  which  jus- 
tifies the  inclusion  of  Leibniz  as  a  Neo- Latin  author.  The  philosopher  is  the 
catechumen,  the  theologian  the  catechist.  Leibniz  views  harmony  as  the  unity 
in  multiplicity  and  from  this  definition  he  never  diverges  except  to  vary  the 
phraseology,  as  simplicity  with  complexity,  etc.^  This  is  explicit  in  his  philos- 
ophy from  this  point  on.  Leibniz  bases  harmony  as  universal  in  the  nature 
of  God  —  in  his  intellect  rather  than  in  his  will  —  so  that  there  is  rationally  some- 
thing more  eternal  than  the  world.  Clearly  the  world  is  not  without  dissonan- 
ces or  disharmonies,  but  one  in  which  harmony  can  and  should  come  from 
disharmony.  This  theory  of  Leibniz  might  be  called  a  theory  of  harmony/- 
disharmony  since  the  two  are  always  recognized  together  as  contraries:  "har- 
monia  et  discordantia,  consistunt  enim  in  ratione  identitatis  ad  diversitatem."^ 

Every  relation,  every  proportion,  every  analogy,  every  proportionality, 
derives  not  from  his  will  but  from  the  nature  of  God,  which  is  the  same 
as  from  the  idea  of  things.  ...  As  it  is  with  relation  or  proportionality, 
so  it  is  with  harmony  and  disharmony.  They  consist  in  the  relation  of 
likeness  to  difference;  harmony  is  unity  in  multiplicity;  it  is  the  greatest 
when  it  unifies  the  greatest  number  of  disordered  elements  and  through 
a  marvelous  interrelation  brings  things  to  the  greatest  unity  of  sound. '^ 

This  definition  is  Leibniz's  most  general  — far  more  general  than  the  "pre- 
established  harmony"  that  occurs  first  in  statements  of  the  "new  system"  of 
1695-1696  — yet  most  treatments  of  Leibniz  on  harmony  fail  to  recognize  that 
his  more  specific  treatment  of  harmony  presupposes  this  more  general  one.^ 

Although  harmonia,  also  called  convenientia,  is  not  a  being  or  substance,  some- 
thing in  itself,  the  cosmos  is  not  thinkable  without  parts  in  relation.  Leibniz 
thus  clarified  his  conceptions  in  his  Dissertation  on  the  Art  of  Combinations ,  (1666), 
which  "contains  the  germ  of  the  plan  for  a  universzJ  characteristic  and  logical 
calculus."^ 

.  .  .  Every  relation  is  either  one  of  union  or  one  of  harmony  [convenientia]. 
In  union  the  things  between  which  there  is  this  relation  are  called  parts, 
and  taken  together  with  their  union,  whole.  This  happens  whenever  we 
take  many  things  simultaneously  as  one.^ 

No  conception  of  the  world  was  less  thinkable  to  Leibniz  than  the  Democ- 
ritean  hypothesis  of  atoms  in  the  void.^  Revived  by  Gassendi,  atomism  had 


PAUL  GRIMLEY  KUNTZ  627 

once  again  come  into  vogue,  and  Leibniz's  rejection  is  based  on  the  suppo- 
sition that  a  material  atom  contains  within  it  "no  reason  for  cohesion."  The 
atomists  invented  "hooks"  by  which  the  atoms  were  held  together,  but  they 
should  have  realized  that  coherence  requires  a  principle  of  unity,  namely  God. 
There  must  be  one  God  for  all, 

an  incorporeal  being  .  .  .  because  of  the  harmony  of  things  among  them- 
selves, especisilly  since  bodies  are  moved  not  individually  by  this  incor- 
poreal being  but  by  each  other.  .  .  .  He  is  intelligent  and  wise  with  regard 
to  their  obedience  to  his  command.  Therefore  such  an  incorporeal  being 
will  be  a  mind  ruling  the  whole  world,  that  is,  God.^ 

Although  the  theory  of  harmony  does  appeal  to  the  ultimate  "idea  of  things," 
as  Leibniz  called  the  divine  intellect,  it  also  recognizes  a  mechanical  system 
of  secondary  causes.  There  is  no  denying  that  God  and  harmony  are  so  closely 
linked  in  Leibniz's  metaphysics  that  one  is  inconceivable  without  the  other, 
and  we  should  ask  whether  one  might  not  be  substituted  for  the  other.  Leibniz 
posed  the  question  thus:  why  should  there  be  something  rather  than  nothing, 
why  should  there  be  a  world  at  all?  There  might  not  have  been  a  world.  But 
for  God  to  have  never  created  the  world  would  have  been  contrary  to  the  de- 
mands of  harmony.  The  Creator  is  inconceivable  without  a  creation,  as  the 
creation  without  a  Creator. 

The  close  association  of  God  and  harmony  —  one  is  not  definable  without 
the  other  — is  made  clear  in  the  following  passages: 

No  wise  man  fails  to  desire  praise,  because  he  desires  harmony.  Praise 
is  a  kind  of  echo  and  duplication  of  harmony.  If  God  had  no  rationad 
creatures  in  the  world,  he  would  still  have  the  same  harmony,  but  alone 
and  devoid  of  echo;  he  would  still  have  the  same  beauty,  but  devoid  of 
reflection  and  refraction  or  multiplication.  Hence  the  wisdom  of  God  de- 
manded rational  creatures  in  which  things  may  multiply  themselves.  So 
one  mind  may  be  a  kind  of  world  in  a  mirror,  as  it  were,  or  in  a  lens 
or  some  kind  of  point  collectively  [uniting]  visual  rays.^^ 

Harmony  is  diversity  compensated  by  identity;  or  the  harmonious  is 
the  uniformly  difform.^^ 

Harmony  is  indeed  employed  by  Leibniz  in  answering  the  most  fundamental 
of  metaphysical  questions.  Although  harmony  is  the  most  ultimate  reason,  it 
is  not  simply  an  a  priori  precondition  in  the  sense  of  a  gratuitous  assumption. 
It  is  fundamental  to  the  idea  of  things: 

What  then  is  the  reason  for  the  divine  intellect?  The  harmony  of  things. 
What  is  the  reason  for  the  harmony  of  things?  Nothing.  For  example, 
no  reason  C2ui  be  given  for  the  ratio  of  2  to  4  being  the  same  as  that  of 
4  to  8,  not  even  the  divine  will.  This  depends  on  the  essence  itself,  or 


628  Leibniz's  theory  of  order 

the  idea  of  things.  [God  is  affected  by]  the  most  perfect  harmony,  and 
thus  [it  is  impossible  for  him  not]  to  be  necessitated  to  do  the  best  by 
the  very  ideaUty  of  things.'^ 

What  excited  Leibniz  in  Bodin's  Colloquium  Heptaplomeres  was  the  stress  inti- 
mated by  the  subtitle,  "On  the  Secrets  of  the  Sublime."  It  stated:  the  ''Elements 
of  a  Secret  Philosophy  of  the  Whole  of  Things  geometrically  demonstrated"  a  mot- 
ivation that  could  hardly  be  more  Pythagorean.^^ 

Leibniz  called  himself  "author  of  the  philosophy  of  the  pre-established  har- 
mony" rather  than  "the  philosopher  of  harmony."  Perhaps  he  did  not  choose 
the  latter  because  that  appellation  had  already  been  taken  by  Pythagoras.  It 
seems  clear  that  Leibniz,  naming  himself  by  a  particular  theorem  of  harmony, 
already  presupposes  the  axiom.  However,  Pythagoreanism,  as  evidenced  in 
Bodin's  Republique,  was  so  common  that  it  could  then  be  assumed  as  part  of 
the  heritage  of  every  intelligent  man.^*  Does  Leibniz  have  as  close  a  connec- 
tion with  Pythagoras  as  had  Bodin?  This  connection  is  evident  in  many  ways. 
Leibniz  comments  on  the  divine  creation  "according  to  weight,  measure,  and 
number,"  in  On  the  General  Characteristic  (c,  1679): 

Men  have  been  convinced  ever  since  Pythagoras  that  the  deepest  mys- 
teries lie  concealed  in  numbers.  It  is  possible  that  Pythagoreans  brought 
over  this  opinion,  like  many  others,  from  the  Orient  to  Greece.  But,  be- 
cause the  true  key  to  the  mystery  was  unknown,  more  inquisitive  minds 
fell  into  futilities  and  superstitions,  from  which  fmally  arose  a  kind  of 
popular  Cabala  far  removed  from  the  true  one.^^ 

By  stressing  a  Pythagorean  theory  of  harmony,  Leibniz's  symbolic  logic  can 
be  viewed  as  one  piece  with  his  metaphysics.  Neither  is  there  a  break  between 
his  metaphysics  and  his  physics,  particularly  since  both  require  a  recognition 
of  numbers. 

Leibniz  acknowledges  a  similarity  between  his  theory  of  soul  and  the  Pyth- 
agorean concept  of  transmigration.  The  one  difference  is  that  Leibniz  believed 
"not  merely  the  soul  but  the  whole  animal  subsists."  Another  difference  is  that 
the  Pythagoreans  assumed  that  it  was  impossible  for  there  to  be  an  infmite 
number  of  souls.  ^^  More  important,  however,  is  the  similarity  of  Leibniz's  sys- 
tem to  Pythagorean  (and  Platonic)  theism;  that  is,  our  minds,  images  of  di- 
vinity, are  prepared  to  understand,  through  mathematics,  "eternal  truths  rooted 
in  the  divine  mind."' 

When  we  link  Leibniz  to  Pythagoreanism,  this  is  not  to  deny  the  influence 
of  other  major  Greek  philosophers.  However,  how  can  Leibniz  be  related  to 
philosophers  who  apparently  contradicted  one  another?  The  clue  lies  in  the 
fact  that  each  of  them  affirmed  order  in  things:  "what  is  real  in  extension  and 
movement  consists  of  nothing  but  the  foundation  of  order  and  regular  sequence 
of  phenomena  and  perceptions."'^  Extension,  to  use  Leibniz's  examples,  is  an 


PAUL  GRIMLEY  KUNTZ  629 

order  of  coexistence;  time,  the  presentation  of  an  order  in  change;  motion  is 
force,  "something  in  the  present  state  which  carries  with  it  a  change  for  the 
future.  The  rest  is  only  phenomena  and  relations. "^^  There  is  no  more  to  be 
sought  than  "well-regulated  phenomena,"  and  we  risk  scepticism  to  seek  be- 
yond. This  is  a  fulfillment  of  the  Pythagorean  "reduction  of  everything  to  har- 
monies of  numbers,  ideas,  and  perceptions."  With  this  "single  perspective 
center,"  all  other  contradictions  fall  into  place:  there  is  Stoic  connectedness  and 
Democritean  mechanism.  Cabalistic  vitalism,  and  Aristotelian  forms.  But  ac- 
cording to  Leibniz,  the  danger  in  all  philosophies  other  than  the  Pythagorean 
order  is  to  fall  into  the  partiality  of  the  sects.  The  sects  impose  limits  upon 
orders  and  so  oversimplify  "the  divisibility  and  subtlety"  and  so  miss  the  "riches 
and  beauty  of  nature."  ^ 

There  is  a  moving  conviction  in  Leibniz's  writing  about  Pythagoras  and  Plato 
because  here  he  fmds  the  truth: 

I  have  shown  on  several  occasions  that  the  fmal  analysis  of  the  laws  of 
nature  leads  us  to  the  most  sublime  principles  of  order  and  perfection, 

which  indicate  that  the  universe  is  the  effect  of  a  universal  intelligent 

22 
power. 

Again,  as  in  the  above,  Leibniz,  in  his  Second  Paper  Responding  to  Clarke,  ap- 
peals to  Pythagoras,  Plato,  and  Aristotle,  who  also  "in  some  measure,  had  a 
knowledge  of  these  [metaphysical]  principles"  that  he  tried  to  establish  in  the 
Theodicy.'^^ 

A  more  difficult  problem  for  Leibniz  lies  in  the  principles  of  Cartesian  du- 
alism: comprehending  how  the  two  orders,  spiritual  and  physical,  could  be 
one  order.  Leibniz  professed  a  single,  ultimate  order,  "the  idea  of  things."  Is 
a  "perpetual  miracle"  required  by  the  Creator  to  bring  mind  and  body  into 
harmony?  This  is  not  necessary,  though,  if  it  is  assumed  that  minds  and  bod- 
ies already  pre-exist  in  a  state  of  harmony.  Thus  it  is  that  Leibniz  called  him- 
self not  according  to  his  axiom  but  according  to  the  theorem  that  followed  from 
it,  "the  Author  of  the  System  of  Pre-established  Harmony,"  for  this  is  the  crit- 
ical juncture  of  his  system.  He  was  justly  proud  of  this  title  because  silthough 
all  men  assumed  harmony,  none  before  him  had  seen  in  so  simple  and  self- 
evident  a  ground  the  consequent  dispelling  of  the  mysteries  of  dualism  and 
occasionalism.^* 

The  souls  [or  vital  principles]  follow  their  laws,  which  consist  in  a  de- 
finite development  of  perceptions  according  to  goods  and  evils,  and  the 
bodies  follow  theirs,  which  consist  in  the  laws  of  motion;  nevertheless, 
these  two  beings  of  entirely  different  kind  meet  together  and  correspond 
to  each  other  like  two  clocks  perfecdy  regulated  to  the  same  time.  It  is 
this  concept  of  miracle  from  purely  natural  actions  which  makes  things 
run  their  course  regulated  in  an  intelligible  manner. ^^ 


630  Leibniz's  theory  of  order 

The  most  satisfactory  conception  of  pre-established  harmony  was  formulated 
by  Leibniz  in  "The  Principles  of  Nature  and  Grace,  Based  on  Reason,"  (1714). 
Here  harmony  is  broadly  conceived,  and  the  soul  and  body  are  terms  in  the 
relationships  constituting  distinct  orders,  a  society  called  the  City  of  God,  and 
a  system  of  efficient  causes.  What  does  it  mean  that  perfect  harmony  is  pre- 
established?  It  establishes  "...  the  accord  and  physical  union  of  the  soul  and 
body,  although  neither  one  can  change  the  laws  of  the  other. "^^  The  accord 
is  a  representative  correspondence,  and  the  assumption  is  that  this  is  as  close 
as  reflection. ^^  There  are  obvious  objections  to  a  correspondence  theory:  each 
interprets  the  world  differently  rather  than  copying  it;  and  perception  is  a  dis- 
tinctively mental  act,  but  these  are  hardly  objections  to  Leibniz's  theory  which 
stresses  perspectival  reflection  and  inner  activity.  Rather,  between  these  two 
orders  we  can  conceive  of  harmony  in  a  sacramental  way:  ^'nature  itself  leads 
to  grace,  and  grace  in  making  use  of  nature,  perfects  it."^^ 

Because  of  the  watchmaker- watch  analogy,  Leibniz,  as  Newton,  is  often  char- 
acterized as  a  deist  whose  theology  sounds  atheistic  since  it  does  not  require 
the  presence  of  God.  But  when  these  analogies  are  put  as  they  properly  should 
be  in  the  tradition  of  Pythagoreanism  and  Cabalism,  his  full  vision  requires 
the  presence  of  God  in  all  things.  It  becomes  much  more  like  the  dictum  of 
Whitehead,  that  the  "aesthetic  order  is  derived  from  the  immanence  of  God. "^^ 
Newton,  like  Leibniz,  acknowledges  the  guidance  of  Pythagoras.  First,  in  the 
doctrine  that  "God  is  the  same  God,  always  and  everywhere.  He  is  omnipres- 
ent not  virtually  only  but  substantially;  for  virtue  cannot  subsist  without  sub- 
stance. In  him  are  all  things  contained  and  moved.  .  .  ."^^  Leibniz  very 
cleverly  uses  Cabala  against  Spinoza's  doctrine  of  God,  "Nothing  but  the  do- 
minion of  necessity,  and  ...  a  blind  necessity. "^^ 

With  the  Hebrew  Cabalists,  Malcuth  or  the  Kingdom,  the  last  of  the  Seph- 
iroth,  signified  that  God  controls  everything  irresistably,  but  gently  and 
without  violence,  so  that  man  thinks  he  is  following  his  own  wifl  while 
he  carries  out  God's. 

This  same  point  is  made  in  a  more  philosophic  way  in  "On  the  Radical  Orig- 
ination of  Things."  Reason  is  the  "necessity  or  essence  [of  permanent  things]; 
but  in  a  series  of  changing  things  ...  it  is  a  prevailing  of  inclinations  .  .  .  for 
here  reasons  do  not  necessitate  (in  the  sense  of  an  absolute  or  metaphysical 
necessity,  whose  contrary  implies  a  contradiction)  but  incline. "^^  There  is 
again  a  parallel  in  Whitehead,  in  that  not  only  a  view  of  the  progress  in  our 
knowledge  of  nature  but  of  progress  in  moral  and  social  behavior  is  suggested. 
The  move  here  is  from  force  to  persuasion. ^'^ 

The  right  beginning  of  a  discussion  of  Leibniz  is  the  principle  of  cosmic  har- 
mony. This  is  how  Leibniz  himself  frequently  begins;  and  when  he  begins  else- 
where, as  with  substance,  he  ultimately  invokes  this  systematic  relationship 
between  the  orders  of  things.  This  stress  on  harmony  is  true  not  only  of  the 


PAUL  GRIMLEY  KUNTZ  63I 

ontology  of  the  system  but  also  of  its  epistemology.  The  best  example  is  pro- 
bably the  "Preliminary  Dissertation  on  the  Conformity  of  Faith  with  Reason," 
Theodicy:  "I  assume  that  two  truths  cannot  contradict  each  other.  ..."  Truths 
are  so  linked,  in  which  reason  consists,  that  although  guided  by  faith,  faith 
itself,  depending  on  experience,  cannot  but  conform  to  the  underlying  order 
of  nature. ^^ 

An  interpretation  of  Leibniz's  system  as  "panhzirmonism"  appealed  to  the 
seasoned  judgment  of  L.  E.  Loemker.  Accordingly,  he  saw  Leibniz's  overall 
philosophy  as  an  attempt  to 

systematize  his  three  basic  interests,  universal  order,  individual  freedom 
(in  the  sense  of  the  expression  of  order  in  an  individual  as  completely 
as  possible),  and  purposive  force.  Ideas  therefore  enter  into  our  exper- 
ience on  three  levels:  (i)  as  the  harmonious  and  perfect  logical  ground 
for  all  existence;  (ii)  as  the  law  of  each  individual  series,  and  of  the  phe- 
nomena resulting  from  the  organized  activities  of  related  series;  and  (iii) 
as  the  structure  of  individual  acts  of  knowledge  and  of  will.  The  doctrine 
is  not  only  the  central  unifying  element  in  his  thought;  it  is  also  one  of 
the  most  fruitful,  for  it  relates  a  dynamic  psychology  and  physics  with 
a  relational  logic  of  possibility,  and  with  a  teleological  metaphysics  sup- 
porting the  whole  variety  of  humain  experience,  scientific  and  non- 
scientific.^^ 

It  is  fair  to  say  that  order  was  more  than  a  precondition  of  existence  for  Leib- 
niz. It  was  the  necessary  and  sufficient  condition  <?/"  existence. 

Emory  University 


Notes 


1.  Yvon  Belaval,  "L'idee  d'harmonie  chez  Leibniz,"  Studium  Generale,  vol.  19,  No. 
9  (1966):  559.  "Leibniz  definit  souvent  I'harmonie:  unitas  in  varietate  (par  ex.  T.  12). 
Au  lieu  d'unitas,  on  trouve  simplicitas  (T.  267),  similitudo  (Conf.  phil.  27),  idtntitas.  {Ibid.), 
consensus,  comme  au  lieu  de  varietas,  on  trouve  multa.  (T.  12,  Conf.  phil.  40),  plura  (T. 
12),  multitudo  (T.  267),  diversitas  (Conf.  phil.  27,  40).  Au  theme  quantitatif  de  I'un  et  du 
multiple  se  marie  qualitatif  d\x  meme  et  du  divers."  Conf.  phil.  =  Confessio  Philosophi, 
texte,  trad.,  notes  par  Yvon  Belaval  (Paris,  1961)  T.  =  Leibniz,  Textes  inedits,  G.  Grua, 
(Paris,  1948). 

2.  Leibniz,  Confessio  Philosophi,  Ein  Dialog,  iibersetzt  von  Otto  Saame  (Frankfurt 
am  Main:  Vittorio  Klostermann,  1967),  p.  50. 

3.  Confessio  Philosophi,  tr.  Saame,  p.  50.  There  is  also  a  very  careful  edition  that  deals 
with  the  dating,  Leibniz,  Confessio  Philosophi:  La  Profession  de  Foi  du  Philosophe,  texte,  tra- 
duction et  notes,  ed.  Yvon  Belaval  (Paris:  Vrin,  1961),  pp.  12-13. 


632  Leibniz's  theory  of  order 


4.  "A  New  System  of  Nature  and  the  Communication  of  Substances,  as  Well  as  the 
Union  Between  the  Soul  and  the  Body ,"  Journal  des  Savants,  (27  June  1695)  and  "Second 
Explanation  of  the  New  System,"  pp.  453-60.  Loemker  notes  that  "the  figure  of  the 
two  clocks  .  .  .  was  in  general  use  among  the  occasionalists.  .  .  .  The  figure  is  not  a  for- 
tunate one  for  Leibniz,  since  it  throws  no  light  upon  the  representative  and  functional 
nature  of  the  relations  between  monads  and  also  neglects  the  distinction  between  the 
passive  and  active  roles  of  the  monads  in  the  divine  harmony."  Leroy  E.  Loemker,  ed., 
Leibniz:  Philosophical  Papers  and  Letters,  rev.  ed.  (Dordrecht:  D.  Reidel,  1969),  p.  461, 
ft.  20.  "It  is  noteworthy  that  the  adjective  'pre-established,'  so  popular  in  the  descrip- 
tions of  Leibniz's  system,  does  not  appear  until  late  in  his  thought,  and  then  with  par- 
ticular reference  to  the  mind-body  problem.  Any  deistic  implications  are  inconsistent 
with  the  immediacy  of  God  in  the  perceptions  and  appetites  of  the  monads.  Leibniz 
was,  however,  already  charged  with  deism  by  his  contemporaries  .  .  ."  (ft.  21). 

5.  Ibid.,  pp.  457,  460. 

6.  Ibid.,  Leibniz  illustrates  that  in  one  intellectual  act  we  read  a  number  in  many 
figures  "which  not  even  the  age  of  Methuselah  would  suffice  to  count  'explicitly'."  But 
he  adds  "the  concept  of  unity  is  abstracted  from  the  concept  of  one  being,"  so  the  basis 
is  ontological,  not  merely  epistemological.  Ibid.,  p.  73. 

7.  Ibid.,  p.  76. 

8.  Ibid.,  p.  112. 

9.  "The  Confessions  of  Nature  Against  Atheists,"  ed.  Loemker,  p.  112.  Divine  har- 
mony is  also  a  moral  ideal:  "he  is  the  most  powerful  or  inviolable  being  of  all  who  will 
seek  as  much  of  the  highest  good  as  possible." 

10.  Ibid.,  p.  138.  In  another  place,  "unity  in  plurality  is  nothing  but  harmony  [Uber- 
einstimmung]."  Ibid.,  p.  426.  The  connection  here  is  with  happiness,  joy,  perfection, 
beauty  and  freedom.  "...  Since  any  particular  being  agrees  with  one  rather  than  an- 
other being,  there  flows  from  this  harmony  the  order  from  which  beauty  arises,  and 
beauty  awakens  love."  Ibid. 

11.  Ibid.,  p.  138. 

12.  Letter  to  Magnus  Wedderkopf  (May  1671)  argues  that  the  divine  intellect  selects 
the  "most  harmonious.  ..."  This  view  in  no  way,  according  to  Leibniz,  detracts  from 
freedom,  which  means  here,  as  it  does  not  in  most  Anglo-American  users,  "to  be  im- 
pelled to  the  best  by  a  right  reason."  Loemker,  pp.  146-47. 

13.  Ibid.,  p.  158. 

14.  The  neglect  of  Leibniz's  general  theory  of  harmony  can  be  seen  in  Ruth  Lydia 
Saw's  Leibniz,  (Harmondsworth,  Middlesex:  Penguin  Books,  1954).  Harmony,  that  is 
the  "Pre-established  Harmony  of  the  universe"  is  reduced  to  "Leibniz's  own  form  of  the 
argument  from  design"  and  his  way  out  of  the  difficulties  of  conceiving  of  the  world 
as  monads  that  cannot  interact,  pp.  72-75.  Such  a  presentation  is  no  better  than  the 
Deus  ex  machina  of  Occasionalism. 

15.  Leibniz  comments  not  only  on  the  magic  and  follies,  but  the  new  expression  of 
the  "deep  rooted"  propensity  evident  in  the  search  of  "Bohme  for  the  Adamic  Language 
as  Natursprache ."  Loemker,  p.  221. 

There  is  unfortunately  a  tradition  in  Leibniz's  interpretation  to  stress  only  the  re- 
jection of  superstition.  Cf.  Belaval,  p.  559. 

16.  Elsewhere  Leibniz  stresses  Pythagorean  immortality.  Loemker,  p.  589  ff. 
The  difference,  in  another  place,  is  that  immortality  is  not  to  be  limited  to  the  human, 

but  applies  to  all  substances  which  are  imperishable  (588).  There  is  then  no  "deficiency 
in  order  ...  or  vacuum  of  forms.'" 

17.  The  Aristotelians  assumed,  falsely  according  to  Leibniz,  that  there  could  be  no 
actual  infinite  (535). 


PAUL  GRIMLEY  KUNTZ  633 

18.  "Letter  to  Hansch  on  the  Platonic  Philosophy  or  on  Platonic  Enthusiasm,"  ed., 
Loemker  (25  July  1707),  p.  592.  By  passing  through  the  "chaos  of  our  perceptions"  we 
penetrate  the  order  of  forms  (593).  The  system  requires  the  correspondence  of  micro- 
cosm to  macrocosm:  "every  mind  contains  a  kind  of  intelligible  world  within  itself." 
This  is  ascribed  to  Plotinus,  and  the  notion  is  of  great  pedagogical  significance:  if  all 
wisdom  is  as  seeds  within  us,  education  is  the  cultivation  of  what  is  present  rather  than 
the  supply  of  what  is  missing. 

19.  "Clarification  of  the  Difficulties  which  Mr.  Bayle  Has  Found  in  the  New  System 
of  the  Union  of  Soul  and  Body,"  ed.,  Loemker  (July  1698),  p.  496. 

20.  Time  is  also  defined  as  "the  order  of  possibilities  that  are  inconsistent  but  nev- 
ertheless have  a  connection  [that  is  succession] ."  Ibid. ,  p.  583.  "But  space  and  time  taken 
together  constitute  the  order  of  possibilities  of  the  one  entire  universe,  so  that  these 
orders  — space  and  time,  that  is  — relate  not  only  to  what  actually  is  but  also  to  anything 
that  could  be  put  in  its  place,  just  as  numbers  are  indifferent  to  the  things  which  can 
be  enumerated,"  If  there  is  this  continuity  of  the  possible  with  the  existent,  there  is  less 
difficulty  in  saying,  as  did  the  Pythagoreans,  "all  is  number."  To  justify  this  last  es- 
timate of  Leibniz:  the  context  is  mathematical,  and  says  he,  "things  can  be  rendered 
intelligible  only  by  these  rules,  for  they  alone  are  capable  along  with  the  rules  of  har- 
mony or  perfection  which  the  true  metaphysics  provides,  of  leading  us  to  the  reasons 
and  intentions  of  the  Author  of  all  things."  Cf.  ibid.,  pp.  583,  Cf.  536. 

21.  Ibid.,  p.  496. 

22.  So  begins  "TENTAMEN  ANAGOGICUM:  An  Analogical  Essay  in  the  Inves- 
tigation of  Causes,"  (Ca.  1696),  which  identifies  his  "primary  aim"  with  that  of  Pytha- 
goras and  Plato,  and  even  Aristotle.  Loemker,  p.  477. 

23.  The  Leibniz- Clarke  Correspondence,  ed.  H.  G.  Alexander,  (Manchester:  University 
Press,  1956),  p.  15. 

24.  L.  J.  Russell,  "Leibniz,  Gottfried  WiUielm,"  in  Paul  Edwards,  ed.,  The  Encyc- 
lopedia of  Philosophy  (N.Y.:  Macmillan,  1967),  4:422-34,  is  typical  of  the  official  view 
that  stresses  "the  way  of  pre-established  harmony"  without  any  attention  to  harmony 
as  such,  and  the  principle  of  order  is  limited  to  the  discovery  of  principles  of  natural 
order  only  ("the  principle  of  continuity,  the  principle  that  every  action  involves  a  re- 
action, and  the  principle  of  the  equality  of  cause  and  effect"),  pp.  428-31,  with  but  a 
hint  of  full  metaphysical  generality. 

25.  G.  G.  Leibniz,  "Considerations  on  Vital  Principles  and  Plastic  Natures,  etc." 
ed.  Loemker  (1705),  p.  587.  The  references  of  miracle  is  to  the  "occasional  causes"  by 
which  change  the  thoughts  of  souls  to  adapt  them  to  changes  in  body  movements,  and 
the  converse,  which  seemed  to  Leibniz  nothing  but  "perpetual  miracle."  The  occasion- 
alists,  in  Leibniz's  view,  tried  to  solve  a  particular  problem,  the  real  influence  of  this 
created  substamce  in  that  and  all  things,  by  appeal  to  a  general  cause.  This  is  calling 
in  a  deus  ex  machina.  "To  do  this  without  offering  any  other  explanation  drawn  from 
the  order  of  secondary  causes  is,  properly  speaking,  to  have  recourse  to  miracle.  In 
philosophy  we  must  try  to  give  a  reason  which  will  show  how  things  are  brought  about 
by  the  Divine  Wisdom  in  conformity  with  the  particular  concept  of  the  subject  in  ques- 
tion," p.  457. 

But  what  Leibniz  judged  "miracle"  was  for  his  critics,  eminently  Samuel  Clarke,  the 
providential  supervision  of  a  heavenly  king.  Leibniz's  concept  of  a  clockmaker  implied 
a  mechanism  that  might  even  be  pushed  to  a  denial  of  creation  itself.  "Clarke's  First 
Reply,"  Loemker,  pp.  676-  77. 

26.  Leibniz  Selections,  ed.,  P.  P.  Wiener,  (N.Y.:  Scribners,  1951),  p.  524. 

27.  "A  New  System  of  Nature,"  ed.  Loemker,  p.  525. 

28.  Cf.  "Bohme  .  .  .  Natursprache,"  ed.  Loemker,  p.  221. 


634  Leibniz's  theory  of  order 


29.  Alfred  North  Whitehead,  Religion  in  the  Making  (New  York:  Macmillan,  1926) 
explicating  the  necessity  "if  there  were  no  order,  there  would  be  no  world."  pp.  104-5. 

30.  "General  Scholium"  of  Newton's  Principia,  in  The  Leibniz- Clarke  Correspondence,  ed., 
H.  G.  Alexander,  (Manchester:  University  Press,  1956),  p.  168. 

31.  G.  W.  Leibniz,  Theodicy:  Essays  on  the  Goodness  of  God,  the  Freedom  of  Man  and  the 
Origin  of  Evil,  E.  M.  Huggard.,  tr.  and  ed.  Austin  Farrar  (London:  Routledge  and  Kegan 
Paul,  1951),  p.  349. 

32.  Ibid.,  p.  348.  The  interpretation  of  Adam's  sin  is  that  man  makes  "a  dominion 
for  himself  within  God's  dominion,  and  .  .  .  assuming  for  himself  a  freedom  indepen- 
dent of  God,  but  that  his  fall  had  taught  him  that  he  could  not  subsist  of  himself,  and 
that  men  must  need  to  be  redeemed  by  the  Messiah." 

33.  Loemker,  p.  486.  Dr.  Dennis  Martin  points  out  that  this  theory  of  harmony  has 
been  traced  to  Plato's  Timaeus  by  Paul  Schrecker,  who  argues  that  it  must  have  been 
written  in  conjunction  with  a  rereading  of  this  Pythagorean  dialogue.  Paul  Schrecker, 
"Leibniz  and  the  Timaeus,"  Review  of  Metaphysics,  4  (1951):495-505. 

34.  Alfred  North  Whitehead,  Adventures  of  Ideas  (New  York:  Macmillan,  1933).  Plato 
"does  fmally  enunciate  without  qualification  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  persuasion,  by 
reason  of  which  ideals  are  effective  in  the  world  and  forms  of  order  emerge"  (213-14). 
This  theme  from  the  Timaeus  is  central  to  both  the  cosmology  and  the  sociology. 

35.  G.  W.  Leibniz,  Theodicy,  pp.  73-75. 

36.  Leroy  E.  Loemker,  "Leibniz's  Doctrine  of  Ideas,"  Philisophical  Review,  Vol.  55, 
No.  2  (May  1946): 247.  Dr.  Loemker  adds  that  "real  essences,  or  the  possibilities  of 
things  are  relations,  which  constitute,  he  says,  'the  largest  field  of  our  knowledge.' "  (248). 

On  the  reduction  of  substance  to  "ordered  process,"  see  Leroy  E.  Loemker,  "On  Sub- 
stance and  Process  in  Leibniz,"  in  Wm.  L.  Reese  and  Eugene  Freeman,  eds.  Process 
and  Divinity:  The  Hartshorne  Festschrift,  (Chicago:  Open  Court,  1964). 


Special  Note 

The  author  thanks  those  who  have  fostered  his  studies:  the  American  Philosophical 
Society  of  Philadelphia,  the  American  Council  of  Learned  Societies,  the  Woodrow  Wil- 
son Center  for  Scholars  of  the  Smithsonian  Institute,  the  Folger  Library,  the  Emory 
Research  Committee,  and  Leroy  E.  Loemker,  for  forty  years  Professor  of  Philosophy 
at  Emory. 


Philosophical  Notions  of  Certitude 
and  Identity  in  Leibniz 

Thomas  Losoncy 

The  century  in  which  Ibn  Sina  was  born,  the  late  10th  in  the  year 
980  near  Boukhara,  was  a  troubled  one  for  knowledge  and  science. 
A  movement  known  as  the  Al-Ashari  from  their  founder's  name,  Al 
Ash',  had  introduced  the  center  of  the  Islamic  world,  Baghdad,  to  one  of  the 
most  thorough- going  Occasionalisms  the  world  has  ever  known.  A  good  ac- 
count of  much  of  this  movement's  teachings  is  presented  in  Moses  Maimo- 
nides'  Guide  for  the  Perplexed,  Part  I,  chapters  73-76.  To  this  movement  no 
causality  could  be  posited  in  the  natural  world,  but  every  change  and  effect 
was  held  to  be  the  marvelous  and  instantaneous  result  of  God's  will.  The  move- 
ment directly  intended  to  eliminate  from  the  Moslem  world  the  influence  of 
Greek  Philosophy  and  its  scientific  tendency  to  locate  necessary  laws  in  nature 
itself. 

Ibn  Sina,  known  to  the  Latin  West  as  Avicenna,  was  to  be  the  recognized 
genius  of  his  day.  Proficient  in  logic,  philosophy,  and  medicine,  he  was  know- 
ledgeable of  the  sciences  generally  and  the  first  great  commentator  and  trans- 
lator of  Aristotle's  works  for  the  Arabic  world.  This  genius  could  claim  to  have 
read  Aristotle's  Metaphysics  a  hundred  times  by  the  age  of  twenty-one  and  could 
add  that  he  thought  he  was  beginning  to  understand  it. 

The  reason  for  turning  to  this  important  figure  in  the  history  of  philosophy 
is  the  particular  course  he  took  in  his  endeavor  to  place  knowledge  and  phi- 
losophy upon  a  certain  foundation.  His  search  for  truth  and  certainty  became 
a  search  for  "essences,"  the  unchanging  inhabitants  of  Avicenna's  philosoph- 
ical world. 

Essences,  he  claimed,  were  of  three  sorts:  a)  those  which  simply  existed  in 
themselves,  b)  essences  in  things,  and  c)  essences  in  the  mind.  Essences,  just 
in  themselves,  would  be  the  domain  of  study  for  Metaphysics.  Essences  in  things 
were  assigned  to  the  study  of  Physics.  Essences  in  the  mind  were  to  be  studied 
by  Logic.  It  is  in  regard  to  "essence"  that  Avicenna  develops  his  notions  of  cer- 
tainty and  truth. 


636  CERTITUDE  AND   IDENTITY  IN   LEIBNIZ 

He  claims  that  the  science  of  Metaphysics  is  not  just  an  abstract  armchair 
exercise  but  that  it  deals  with  "real  being"  abstractly  considered.  Among  Meta- 
physics' primary  notions  are:  1)  being  (^n^)  — that  which  is,  2)  thing  (res)  —  Sin 
object  about  which  some  truth  can  be  said,  and  3)  the  necessary  (necesse)  —  a. 
feature  or  property  of  the  thing  itself.  The  reason  for  this  necessity  based  upon 
the  thing  itself  is  the  fact  that  "everything  which  is"  is  at  the  very  same  time 
"that  which  it  is,"  a  "definite  kind"  — and  so  it  cannot  possible  be  mistaken  for 
something  other  than  itself.  Notice  that  the  principle  of  identity  is  invoked  here 
to  assure  one  that  a  thing  is  fixed  and  certain  conceptually.  In  effect  what  is 
neither  a  being  nor  a  thing  conceivable  through  its  quiddity  or  essence  is  no- 
thing and  simply  unable  to  be  thought  or  conceived.^ 

Claiming  that  "what  an  essence  is"  is  its  truth,  Avicenna  distinguishes  be- 
tween an  "absolutely  necessary  being"  and  those  beings  which  are  necessary 
through  their  causes.  By  this  means  he  is  able  to  allow  for  a  kind  of  certitude 
and  necessity  for  the  mind  even  when  it  is  confronted  with  the  contingent  phys- 
ical world  by  insisting  that  the  quiddity,  the  conceptual  aspect  of  a  thing,  is 
its  basic  truth  while  its  existence  is  something  contingent,  changing,  and  not 
possessing  the  same  unchanging  certitude.  Only  God  will  be  granted  absolute 
being  or  existence.^ 

The  long  and  short  of  these  careful  distinctions  and  definitions  by  Avicenna 
was  simply  to  show  that  science  and  certain  knowledge,  necessary  and  non- 
contingent  truth,  were  rooted  in  the  essences  of  things.  These,  after  all,  when 
properly  grasped  and  understood,  were  invariable  and  unalterable  because  of 
the  principle  of  identity.  The  "truth"  of  a  thing  was  its  "whatness,"  its  quiddity 
or  essence.  In  this  fashion  Avicenna  sent  philosophers  and  scientists  alike  off 
on  a  search  for  essences.  Knowledge  of  existence,  referring  to  what  was  always 
changing  and  contingent,  was  considered  impossible  to  know  or  even  in  the 
realm  of  the  nonrational.  The  influence  of  Avicenna  was  to  be  immense  and 
especially  prevalent  in  the  later  scholastics  of  the  Middle  Ages  — which,  in  turn, 
influenced  the  scholastics  of  later  centuries. 

Born  in  1646  at  Leipzig,  Leibniz  did  not  enter  a  very  calm  age  but  rather 
one  seriously  troubled  about  the  status  of  intellectual  knowledge  and  sciences. 
Descartes  was  still  sending  shock  waves  through  the  academic  world  because 
of  his  "methodic  doubt."  The  British  Empiricists  were  themselves  beginning 
to  limit  knowledge  in  their  effort  to  establish  just  what  it  is  that  one  can  know. 
In  addition,  Malebranche  provided  the  period  with  a  powerful  dosage  of  Oc- 
casionalism. In  such  a  setting  Leibniz  appears  as  a  genius  in  the  worlds  of  logic, 
mathematics,  and  philosophy  generally,  as  well  as  a  skilled  diplomat  who  car- 
ried on  an  enormous  correspondence  with  many  of  Europe's  leading  rulers  and 
statesmen. 

Now,  in  fact,  Leibniz  learned  a  great  deal  from  later  medievalists  and  one 
might  gain  some  sense  of  this  debt  by  examining  him  briefly  in  relation  to  Av- 
icenna's  position  on  certitude  and  necessity.  Leibniz  was,  of  course,  also  fa- 


THOMAS  LOSONCY  637 

miliar  with  both  a  wide  range  of  figures:  Augustine,  Averroes,  St.  Thomas 
and  so  forth  — as  well  as  with  numerous  teachings  about  substance,  necessity, 
free  will,  providence,  and  the  like  in  the  Middle  Ages. 

But  in  what  terms  would  he  understand  "necessity"  and  "certitude?"  Leibniz 
found  a  ready  path  before  him  with  Descartes'  criterion  of  "clear  and  distinct 
ideas."  However,  he  would  rework  this  familiar  doctrine  by  pointing  out  that 
to  know  something  clearly  and  distinctly  means  nothing  more  than  to  know 
it  absolutely.  Why  this?  Leibniz  answers  that  to  know  absolutely  means  to  know 
what  has  to  be;  and  what  is  known  clearly  and  distinctly,  is  known  so  absolutely 
that  it  must  necessarily  be  as  it  is  and  nothing  further.  This  insight  is  nicely 
stated  in  an  opuscule.  On  First  Truths,  where  Leibniz  explains  that  a  certain 
judgment  means  an  absolute  conformity  between  the  idea  of  the  thing  known 
and  the  thing  itself: 

Primary  truths  are  those  which  either  state  a  term  of  itself  or  deny  an  op- 
posite of  its  opposite.  For  example,  "A  is  A,"  or  "A  is  non  not-A";  "If  it 
is  true  that  A  is  B,  it  is  false  that  A  is  not  B,  or  that  A  is  not-B";  again, 
"Each  thing  is  what  it  is,"  "Each  thing  is  like  itself,  or  is  equal  to  itself," 
"Nothing  is  greater  or  less  than  itself  — and  others  of  this  sort  which, 
though  they  may  have  their  own  grades  of  priority,  can  aill  be  included 
under  the  one  name  of  "identities."^ 

Now  Leibniz  will  further  develop  this  notion  to  tell  one  that  to  know  what 
a  thing  is  is  to  know  its  sufficient  reason.  In  effect,  the  judgment  of  identity 
expresses  the  reality  of  a  thing  because  it  announces  what  the  thing  was  in- 
tended to  be  by  God  as  well  as  what  it  is  in  itself.  Thus,  one  can  see  here  the 
basis  Leibniz  produces  for  certainty  and  knowledge  generally.  The  basis  lies 
in  the  "whatness"  of  a  thing,  which  for  him  is  the  intelligible  reality  of  that  thing: 

In  identities  this  connexion  and  inclusion  of  the  predicate  in  the  subject 
is  express,  whereas  in  all  other  truths  it  is  implicit  and  must  be  shown 
through  the  analysis  of  notions,  in  which  a  priori  demonstration  consists. 
But  this  is  true  in  the  case  of  every  affirmative  truth,  universal  or  par- 
ticular, necessary  or  contingent,  and  in  the  case  of  both  an  intrinsic  and 
an  extrinsic  denomination.  And  here  there  lies  hidden  a  wonderful  se- 
cret in  which  is  contained  the  nature  of  contingency,  or,  the  essential 
distinction  between  necessary  and  contingent  truths;  zmd  by  this  also  there 
is  removed  the  difficulty  about  the  fatal  necessity  of  even  those  things 
which  are  free.* 

Leibniz  will  go  still  further  in  adding  that  to  know  a  thing's  reason  for  ex- 
isting is  to  know  the  thing  in  its  essence,  so  that  the  essential  connection  of 
2ill  the  predicates  —  of  all  the  qualities,  past,  present,  and  future,  of  everything 
that  had  and  that  will  happen  to  it  —  is  reducible  to  an  essential  expression  of 
what  the  thing  itself  is: 


638  CERTITUDE  AND   IDENTITY  IN   LEIBNIZ 

For  from  this  there  at  once  arises  the  accepted  axiom, "There  is  nothing 
without  a  reason,"  or,  "There  is  no  effect  without  a  cause."  For  otherwise 
there  would  be  a  truth  which  could  not  be  proved  a  priori,  i.e.,  which 
is  not  analysed  into  identities;  and  this  is  contrary  to  the  nature  of  truth, 
which  is  always,  either  expressly  or  implicitly,  identical.^ 

Thus  far  Leibniz  is  seen  to  show  a  concern  with  certitude  and  necessity  rem- 
iniscent of  the  efforts  of  Avicenna,  but  with  the  modification  of  Descartes'  cri- 
terion of  "clear  and  distinct  ideas"  as  an  additional  factor.  Two  questions  cannot 
be  avoided  regarding  the  thought  of  Avicenna  and  Leibniz  in  the  history  of 
philosophy.  The  first  is  philosophical  and  general.  Of  what  significance  and 
merit  are  the  projects  of  these  two  thinkers  either  for  philosophy  or  even  for 
the  world  of  thought  at  large?  The  second  is  historical.  Does  Avicenna  have 
some  kind  of  direct  influence  upon  Leibniz's  philosophy? 

The  first  question  might  be  answered  in  a  round-about  way.  This  involves 
ascertaining  the  impact  of  their  respective  positions  upon  how  one  thinks  about 
the  world.  Then  it  will  help  to  consider  whether  or  not  their  procedures  are 
justified  in  some  way. 

What  Avicenna  and  Leibniz  are  doing  is  searching  for  the  scientific  within 
the  fixed  and  unchanging.  In  this  respect  their  efforts  hearken  all  the  way  back 
to  Parmenides  and  Plato.  Parmenides  had  identified  the  intelligible  with  what 
is  or  with  being,^  and  Plato  had  further  emphasized  the  intelligible  as  the  fixed 
content  of  an  idea  that  cannot  be  confused  with  anything  else  but  is  one  with 
itself  or  self-identical.^  At  the  same  time  both  Avicenna  and  Leibniz  are  sep- 
arating existence  and  the  contingent  from  science  and  knowledge.  Existence 
belongs  to  the  domain  of  the  nonrational,  changing,  and  contingent.  In  effect 
existence  cannot  come  under  knowledge  for  them  because  it  is  a  kind  of  ex- 
trinsic accident  that  may  come  to  or  leave  from  a  thing.  The  impact  of  this 
position  then  is  to  insist  that  the  "real"  is  the  intelligible,  but  only  in  the  con- 
ceptual or  the  realm  of  ideas.  Such  a  world,  however,  is  a  static  one  and  not 
in  total  conformity  with  the  world  in  which  one  moves  and  lives.  But  then  such 
is  the  allurement  of  Descaretes'  formula.  Clear  and  distinct  ideas  are  mere  ab- 
straction and  their  model,  the  world  of  mathematics,  is  the  epitome  of  such 
idealized  being.  In  the  world  of  mathematics  everything  is  clear  and  distinct 
because  in  it  everything  is  present  as  located  there  by  definition.  The  entire 
content  of  a  mathematical  concept  is  as  one  defines  it.  But  what  of  the  world 
that  is  not  mathematical? 

Here  one  discovers  how  Avicenna  and  Leibniz  have  sold  reality  short.  The 
world  of  things  has  greater  intellectual  content  than  man  can  ever  hope  to  man- 
age by  means  of  a  concept.  There  are  beings  by  definition  such  as  the  symbols 
of  the  mathematical  universe.  Yet  it  is  the  projects  of  both  Avicenna  and  Leib- 
niz to  search  for  essential  definitions  of  the  extramental  world  such  that  all 
predicates,  qualitative  and  quantitative,  can  be  deduced  from  these  definitions. 


THOMAS  LOSONCY 


639 


Such  has  always  been  the  fond  dream  of  those  oriented  toward  the  logical  and 
the  mathematicaJ.  However,  there  is  something  about  experience  that  is  prior 
to  the  concept  and  the  essence  of  things. 

It  is  things'  actualization,  the  existence  that  they  are  given  and  upon  which 
they  depend,  that  one  must  recognize.  One  cannot,  after  all,  say  anything  about 
a  nonexistent  being  because  there  is  simply  nothing  there  to  which  one  is  able 
to  refer.  This  is  even  more  obvious  when  one  attempts  to  identify  something 
in  the  physical  world.  There  must  be  an  X,  a  something,  already  existing  whose 
identity  and  essence  one  can  then  try  to  identify.  Until  the  essence  or  quiddity 
in  question  is  actualized  it  is  not  there  for  intellectual  questioning  as  to  what 
it  might  be.  Such  a  crucial  side  of  the  world,  however,  a  side  where  there  are 
constant  comings  and  goings,  changes,  the  passage  and  ravages  as  well  as  bles- 
sings of  time,  all  these  are  outside  essences  and  not  susceptible  to  knowledge 
in  the  way  one  knows  essences.  It  is  this  alive  and  dynamic  world  that  Av- 
icenna's  and  Leibniz's  worlds  of  certainty  would  deny  to  everyone,  not  just  the 
philosopher.  This  cannot  be  supported  anymore  than  if  one  argued  that  rain 
did  not  fall  as  long  as  one  was  shielded  by  an  umbrella.  Certainly  within  the 
limits  of  the  umbrella  there  would  be  no  rain  but  that  is  hardly  the  whole  story. 
So  too  if  one  states  that  all  there  is  to  know  are  essences  one  has  subscribed 
to  a  very  narrow  view  of  this  universe. 

And  what  of  the  historical  connections  between  these  two  masters?  A  few 
words  must  suffice  here.  Clearly  there  are  definite  and  considerable  parallels 
between  the  thought  and  objectives  of  these  two  thinkers.  Whether  Leibniz 
directly  read  the  Latin  Avicenna  or  merely  absorbed  him  through  later  scho- 
lastics can  only  be  settled  when  a  full  inventory  of  Leibniz's  writings  and  li- 
brary is  realized.  Hopefuly  this  will  not  be  too  much  longer  in  the  offing. 

For  the  present,  one  might  note  that  Leibniz's  mention  of  haecceitas  in  his 
Discourse  on  Metaphysics^  would  likely  come  from  John  Duns  Scotus.^  The  same 
is  true  for  his  reference  to  man,  in  this  world,  as  a  "traveler. "^^  Scotus  is,  in 
turn,  deeply  indebted  to  Avicenna.  Finally,  it  seems  quite  reasonable  to  say 
that  if  Avicenna  marks  the  earnest  beginning  of  the  search  for  essences  in  the 
field  of  philosophy  and  contributes  the  important  distinction  between  the  nec- 
essary and  the  possible,  then  it  is  Leibniz  who  found  these  essences  in  the  world 
of  his  day  and,  as  a  result,  was  quite  equipped  to  claim  that,  of  necessity ,  this 
was  the  best  of  all  possible  worlds.  Of  this  latter,  and  many  other  propositions, 
Leibniz  maintains  one  can  be  certain. 

Villanova  University 


640  CERTITUDE  AND   IDENTITY  IN   LEIBNIZ 

Notes 


1.  "Dicemus  igitur  quod  ens  et  res  et  necesse  talia  sunt  quod  statim  imprimuntur 
in  anima  prima  impressione  quae  non  acquiritur  ex  aliis  notioribus  se."  Philosophia  Prima, 
liber  I,  capitulum  vi;  Avicenna.  Opera.  Frankfurt  am  Main:  Minerva  G.m.b.H.,  1961; 
p.  72,  column  b.  Cf.  "Que  autem  promptiora  sunt  omnibus  rebus  sicut  res  et  ens  et 
unum  etcetera.  Et  ideo  nullo  modo  potest  manifestari  aliquod  horum  probatione  quae 
non  sit  circularis  vel  per  aliquid  quod  sit  notius  ills,"  ibid. 

2.  "Veritas  autem  intelligitur:  et  esse  absolute  in  singularibus  et  intelligitur  esse  et- 
ernum:  et  intelligitur  dispositio  dictionis  vel  intellectus  qui  signat  dispositionem  in  re 
exteriori  cum  est  ei  equalis.  Dicens  enim  hoc  dictio  est  vera  et  haec  sententia  est  vera. 
Igitur  necesse  est  id  quod  per  seipsum  est  Veritas  semper.  Quicquid  igitur  est  praeter 
necesse  esse  quod  est  unum  falsum  est  in  se.  Veritas  autem  que  adequatur  rei  ilia  est 
certa  ut  puto  respectu  suae  comparationis  ad  rem  et  est  Veritas  respectu  comparationis 
rei  ad  ipsam.  Ex  dictionibus  autem  veris  ilia  est  dignior  dici  vera  cuius  certitudo  est 
semper.  Sed  quae  dignior  est  ad  hoc  est  ilia  cuius  certitudo  est  prima  et  non  per  cau- 
sam."  ibid.,  liber  I,  capitulum  ix;  Opera,  p.  74,  columns  a-b. 

3.  Gottfried  Wilhelm  Leibniz,  Primary  Truths,  trans.  Mary  Morris  and  G.  H.  R.  Par- 
kison  (London:  J.  M.  Dent  &  Sons  Ltd.,  1973),  p.  87. 

4.  ibid.,  pp.  87-88. 

5.  ibid.,  p. 88. 

6.  Parmenides.  Fragments  no.  3  and  8. 

7.  Plato's  Sophist  254C-258E  brings  out  the  features  of  the  intelligible  mentioned  here. 

8.  ".  .  .  whereas  God  seeing  the  individual  notion  or  haecceity  of  Alexander  sees  in 
it  at  the  same  time  the  foundations  and  reason  of  all  the  predicates  that  can  be  truly 
said  of  him,.  .  ."  Discourse  on  Metaphysics,  trans.  Peter  G.  Lucas  and  Leslie  Grint  (Man- 
chester, England:  University  of  Manchester  Press,  1953)  8:13. 

9.  See  the  thorough  discussion  of  this  notion  in  John  Duns  Scotus.  Opus  Oxoniense. 
liber  II,  distinctio  3,  quaestiones  4-6,  as  found  in  the  Opera  Omnia,  ed.  Vives  (Paris: 
1891-1895)  12:  91-144. 

10.  Leibniz.  Discourse  .  .  .,  "But  always  to  explain  the  admirable  economy  of  this  choice 
is  something  that  cannot  be  while  we  are  travellers  in  this  world; .  .  ."30:50  (italics  mine). 
The  translation,  "travellers,"  with  the  limitations  mentioned  adequately  reflects  Sco- 
tus's  own  term,  "wayfarer,"  and  the  limitations  he  finds  this  places  on  human  know- 
ledge as  it  occurs  in  this  world.  Scotus  specifically  inquires  whether  Divine  Revelation 
is  necessary  for  man,  pro  status  isto,  in  order  to  reach  his  appointed  end.  See  the  dis- 
cussion in  the  beginning  of  the  Opus  Oxoniense,  prologus,  pars  I,  questio  I,  critical  edition 
of  C.  Balic  (Vatican:  1950)  1:1. 


"Propositio  vel  inaudita 

et  modis  omnibus  absurda" 

Humanistische  Philologie,  Bibelexegese 

und  utopische  Literatur* 

Barbara  Marx 


Anfang  Marz  1516  erschien  bei  Froben  in  Basel  das  lange  vorberei- 
tete  Novum  Instrumentum  des  Erasmus;  im  Dezember  des  gleichen  Jah- 
res,  auf  seine  Veranlassung,  bei  Martens  im  orthodoxen  Lowen  die 
Utopia  des  Thomas  Morus.  Beide  Werke  bekennen  sich,  unter  verschiedenen 
Vorzeichen,  zu  einem  gleichen  humanistischen  Pladoyer.^  Die  erste  Kritik 
des  Lowener  Theologen  Martin  Dorp  zum  Encomium  Moriae  und  zur  latei- 
nischen  Bearbeitung  des  Neuen  Testaments^  hatte  Erasmus  im  Jahr  zuvor, 
vermutlich  im  April  1515,  bei  eben  dem  Peter  Gilles  in  Antwerpen  einsehen 
konnen,  der  als  Adressat,  Editor  und  Diailogpartner  der  Utopia  auftreten  wiirde. 
Morus  verfafite  seine  Antwort  auf  Dorps  zweiten  Brief^  stellvertretend  fiir 
den  Freund  etwa  gleichzeitig  mit  dem  zweiten  Buch  der  Utopia  gegen  Ende 
seiner  diplomatischen  Mission  in  Belgien  im  Oktober  1515.  In  der  Folgezeit 
lauft  die  Druckgeschichte  beider  Werke  Jahre  lang  parallel.  Den  Initiativen 
des  Erasmus  fiir  die  Publikation  der  Utopia  ab  Ende  September  1516  und 
wahrend  des  ganzen  Jahren  1517*  stehen  die  Bemiihungen  von  Morus  ge- 
geniiber,  die  positive  Aufnahme  des  Novum  Instrumentum  unter  der  hohen  eng- 
Hschen  Geistlichkeit  zu  sichern  und  Erasmus  die  diplomatischen  Kanale  nach 
Venedig,  im  Hinblick  auf  die  geplante  Neuauflage,  offen  zu  halten.  Die  bei 
der  Vorbereitung  dieser  zweiten  Auflage  entstandene  Paraphrasis  zum  Romer- 
brief  sandte  der  Autor  unmittelbar  nach  deren  Erscheinen  im  November  1517 
nach  London,  wo  Morus  bereits  Kritik  am  Novum  Instrumentum  hatte  abfangen 
miissen. 

Erst  im  Marz  1518  erschien  auch  die  von  Erasmus  selbst  vorbereitete  Bas- 
ler  Ausgabe  der  Utopia,  fiir  die  er  die  nochmals  von  Morus  korrigierte  Fas- 
sung  mit  dessen  Epigrammata  "una  cum  meis  aliquot  lucubrationibus" 
zusammengestellt  hatte. ^  Der  Drucker  Froben  und  sein  Mitherausgeber 
Beatus  Rhenanus  konnten  seit  Juni  1517  uber  diese  Texte  verfiigen,  hielten 
aber  den  zusatzlichen  Abdruck  von  Guillaume  Budes  Vorwort  zur  Pariser 


642  HUMANISTISCHE  PHILOLOGIE,    BIBELEXEGESE  UND  UTOPISCHE  LITERATUR 

Ausgabe  der  Utopia  vom  September  1517  fiir  unentbehrlich/  ein  Vorwort, 
fiir  dessen  Abfassung  nicht  so  sehr  das  Empfehlungsschreiben  von  Erasmus 
fiir  die  Utopia,  sondern  vielmehr  die  Kenntnis,  die  Mitarbeit  an  der  philolo- 
gisch  intendierten  Vulgatakritik  des  Hollanders  verantwordich  gewesen  sein 
diirfte,  Denn  weitaus  mehr  als  die  in  der  Lowener  Erstausgabe  1516  verei- 
nigten  epistolae  prefatoriae  bestand  Budes  Schreiben  auf  der  reformerischen,  ja 
"reformatorischen"  Dimension  der  Utopia,  in  deren  literarischem  Spiegelbild 
er  "Christi  rerum  humanarum  conditoris  instituta"  (CM^  IV, 6/25-26),  "Chri- 
stianos  vero  ritus  ac  germanam  ipsam  sapientiam"  (CW^  IV,  10/3)  erkannte.^ 
Der  Brief  des  franzosischen  Humanisten,  der  im  ausdriicklich  von  Erasmus 
autorisierten  Nachwort  des  Beatus  Rhenanus  ein  pragnantes  Echo  fand  {CW 
IV,  10/3  sqq.),  bezog  so  vielleicht  ungewoUt,  aber  kongenial  das  Werk  des 
Englanders  in  das  grofiangelegte  Programm  ein,  fiir  das  Froben  im  Namen 
des  Erasmus  seit  dem  Druck  des  Novum  Instrumentum  einstand.  In  seinem  kurzen 
Vorwort  zu  den  im  Anhang  der  Utopia  publizierten  Epigrammata  des  Erasmus, 
datiert  "Cal.Martis  M.D. XVIII,"  erinnerte  der  Drucker  beziehungsreich  an 
die  "Evangelica  et  Apostolica  monumenta"  und  an  die  "doctissimas  illas  in 
Novum  Instrumentum  Annotationes,"^  fiir  deren  zweite  Auflage  im  gleichen 
Monat  Marz  die  Weichen  gestellt  worden  waren.^^  Der  Band  der  Annotationes 
war  bereits  im  August  1518  fertiggestellt;  im  Dezember  1518  befand  sich  die 
Sektion  der  Paulusbriefe  des  Novum  Testamentum  im  Druck,  wahrend  gleich- 
zeitig,  mit  dem  Nachdruck  der  Sammelausgabe  vom  Marz  1518,  die  vierte 
Auflage  der  Utopia  ihrem  Ende  entgegenging.^^  Der  Text  der  Utopia  selbst 
trug  den  Kolophon  vom  November  1518,  als  auch  die  Paraphrasis  in  Epistolam 
Pauli  ad  Romanos,  die  teilweise  die  Neuerungen  des  lateinischen  Novum  Testa- 
mentum vorwegnahm,^^  erstmals  bei  Froben  erschienen  war:  im  argumentum  zur 
Paraphrasis  formulierte  Erasmus  nochmails  deutlich  die  Aktualitat  und  Niitzlich- 
keit  der  paulinischen  Vorschriften,  unabhangig  von  deren  historischem  Kon- 
text,  fiir  die  Zeitgenossen  (LB  VII, 777-78).  Das  Vorwort  Budes  zur  Utopia 
konnte  daher,  in  dieser  vierten  Auflage,  ganz  wegfallen:  das  Novum  Testamen- 
tum war  ausreichende  Referenz  und  Illustration  fiir  die  utopische  Literatur. 
Diese  behauptete  Annaherung  kann  natiirlich  nicht  von  Froben  und  seinen 
Mitarbeitern,  sondern  nur  von  Erasmus  selbst,  etwa  mit  der  Auswahl  der  ei- 
genen,  gemeinsam  mit  der  Utopia  publizierten  Epigrammata  gesteuert  worden 
sein.  Denn  die  religiosen  Gedichte  darunter  erinnern  auch  von  ihrer  Prasen- 
tation  her  an  die  wahrend  des  englischen  Aufenthalts  gewonnenen  bibelkri- 
tischen  Erkenntnisse  ihres  Verfassers.  Das  provokante  Weglassen  der 
kanonischen  Heiligentitel  "In  laudem  Annae  aviae  lesu  Christi,"  "In  laudem 
Michaelis  et  angelorum  omnium  Ode  .  .  .  sapphica"  (L5V,  1325-26;  1321-22) 
erscheint  als  notwendiges  Korrelat  der  Lektiire  von  Ro  15,25-26  (LB  VI, 650) 
und  der  Paraphr.  zu  Ro  16,2  (LB  VII, 829-30).  Nicht  minder  aufschlufireich 
geben  sich  die  Explikationen  des  Credo,  etwa  im  9.  Teil  "Sanctam  Ecclesiam": 


BARBARA   MARX  643 

E  te  confiteor,  sanctissima  concio/^  qua  gens 
Christigena  arcano  nexu  coit  omnis  in  unum. 
Corpus  et  unanimis  capiti  sociatur  lesu. 
Hinc  proprium  nescit,  sed  habet  communia  cuncta.^* 

Die  Anlehnung  an  Ac  2,44-45  im  letzten  Vers  hat  ihre  spiegelbildliche  Ent- 
sprechung  in  der  einzigen  Textstelle  der  Utopia,  innerhalb  der  narratio  des  zwei- 
ten  Buches,  die  selbst  eine  explizite  Analogie  zum  Gemeinbesitz  der  christlichen 
Urgemeinde  herstellt  (CW^IV,218/l-8).^^ 

Die  ironische  Verkehrung,  die  Morus  an  eben  dieser  Stelle  zwischen  "haere- 
sis"  und  "religio"  vornimmt,  ist  zwar  philologisch  durch  Erasmus  {Ann.  ad 
^(7,26,5  LB  VI, 532;  cf.  auch  Ann.  ad  Ro  1,3,  erst  1519  A/T  11,243)  gerecht- 
fertigt,  bezieht  aber  ihren  polemischen  Duktus  aus  dem  doppeldeutigen  Um- 
gang  mit  der  theologischen  Begrifflichkeit:  die  "ritus  Christiani"  sind  selbst  als 
"Haresie"  travestiert.  Die  Behauptung  des  Hythlodaus  im  ersten  Buch  der 
Utopia  "equidem  si  omittenda  sunt  omnia  tanquam  insolentia  atque  absurda, 
quaecunque  perversi  mores  hominum  fecerunt,  ut  videri  possint  2iliena,  dis- 
simulemus  oportet  apud  Christianos  pleraque  omnia,  quae  Christus  docet"  {CW 
IV  100/17-20)  verdoppelt  sich  nicht  nur  im  Nachwort  des  Autors  von  1517 
(CP1^IV,248),  sondern  vor  allem  als  "propositionem  vel  inauditam  et  modis 
omnibus  absurdam"  der  Bibelexegese  des  Erasmus. ^^  Denn  nicht  die  Litera- 
tur,  sondern  die  Philologie  hatte  dem  Haretischen  das  Terrain  des  Imagina- 
ren  eroffnet. 


II 

Literatur  und  Philologie  entfalteten  sich  im  gleichen  guten  Glauben,  der  be- 
reits  die  Veroffentlichung  von  Vallas  Annotationes  in  Novum  Testamentum  1 505 
bestimmt  hatte.  Dafi  diese  so  gut  wie  keine  Resonanz  hervorrief,  bestatigt  nur, 
dafi  die  Ergebnisse  der  Philologie  innerhalb  ihrer  Fachgrenzen  neutralisiert 
wurden:  so  hatte  es  Dorp  mit  Bezug  auf  V2illa  und  Lefevre  d'Etaples  gefor- 
dert.^^  Erst  in  den  Zwischenraumen  zwischen  Theologie  und  Philologie,  in 
den  Liicken,  die  sich  in  der  Konfrontation  von  Vulgata  und  erasmischer  Neu- 
iibersetzung  eroffneten,  entwickelten  die  Annotationes  des  Erasmus  ihre  eigene 
polemische  Ambiguitat,^^  von  der  auch  die  Selbstdarstellung  des  Hollanders, 
bis  hin  zur  Mitgliedschaft  in  der  Theologenfakultat  von  Lowen,  nicht  frei  war. 
Denn  seine  Exegese  legte  die  evangelischen  Regeln  nicht  "iuxta  praeceptum," 
sondern  vorzugsweise  "iuxta  indulgentiam"  (1  Cor  7,7)  aus  oder  gar  "iuxta  ig- 
noscentiam,"  wie  Erasmus  1516  und  in  den  Annotationes  ubersetzte  {LB  VI, 686), 
mit  dem  Anspruch  "ad  haec  quoque  tempora  salutaris  2iliquid  doctrinae  .  .  . 
accommodari"  {LB  VII, 7 7 7)  und  dem  Ziel  ihrer  Einbindung  in  gesellschzdt- 
Uche  Institutionen.  Fiir  eine  solche  Exegese  hatte  Vzdlas  Philologie,  die  das 


644  HUMANISTISCHE  PHILOLOGIE,   BIBELEXEGESE  UND  UTOPISCHE  LITERATUR 

dogmatische  Geriist  von  Institutionen,  weltlichen  wie  geistlichen,  kritisch 
iiberpriifte,  vielfach  die  Voraussetzungen  geschaffen. 

In  den  Elegantiae  VI  38^^  hatte  Valla  die  juristische  Inkonsistenz  des  BegrifTs 
"mulier"  bemangelt,  aus  der  auch  die  Unklarheiten  der  Vulgata  resultierten: 
"Cur  autem  in  illo  [1  Cor  7,4]  non  dixit  *uxor'  potius  quam  'mulier  sui  corporis 
potestatem^^  non  habet'?  An  ea  mulier,  quae  non  est  uxor,  non  habet  poltes- 
tatem  sui  corporis?  Ergo  dicendum  erat  'uxor'.  ...  At  quomodo  stabit  'unus- 
quisque  suam  mulierem  habeat'?  An  non  est  concubina  mulier?"  (^A'^7",864). 
Valla  pladierte  fiir  eine  einheitliche  Ubersetzung^^  "uxor"  in  alien  Apostel- 
briefen  (ad  Eph  5,22-23  ^A^7;878;  ad  Col  3,18-19  ^A^r,880),  eine  Lektion, 
die  sich  Erasmus  bereits  1506  zueigen  gemacht  hat.  Die  Korrektur  der  Vul- 
gatastelle  1  Cor  7,34  ("et  mulier  innupta  et  virgo  cogitat  quae  Domini  sunt") 
in  "divisa  sunt  hec  duo,  mulier  et  virgo.  Innupta  curat  ea  quae  sunt  Domini" 
{Inedit,  361)  hangt  zwar  noch  von  der  Defmition  der  Elegantiae  ab,  wird  je- 
doch  in  den  Annotationes  prazisiert;  "illud  addam,  hoc  certe  loco  rectius  yuvTj 
vertisset  'uxorem'  quam  'mulierem,'  tametsi  vox  ea  utrumque  significat"  {LB 
VI, 691;  cf.  ASD  XI, 2, 138-40).  Ahnliche  Berichtigungen  nimmt  Erasmus  in 
den  Ann.  ad  Ac  1,14  vor  (A7  11,376),  wo  selbst  Valla  "mulier"  gelten  liefi 
(^A^r,847),  und  Ann.  ad  1  Cor  9,5-6  (jedoch  erst  1519  TVT  11,336).  In  der  la- 
teinischen  Ubersetzung  der  einschlagigen  Paragraphen  1  Cor  7  und  Eph  5  ver- 
wendet  Erasmus  durchgehend  den  Terminus  "uxor"  ab  1506,  mit 
einschneidenen  Veranderungen  etwa  fiir  die  Exegese  von  1  Cor  7,1  "bonum 
est  mulierem  non  tangere,"  einer  Textstelle,  die  Erasmus  als  "bonum  est  ho- 
mini  uxorem  non  attingere"  wiedergibt  {Inedit,  360)  und  erlautert:  "bonum 
est  abstinere  ab  uxore,  hoc  est  non  ducere  uxorem"  {NI  11,465). 

Der  dezidierte  Riickgriff  auf  die  Institution  und  ihre  gesellschaiftlichen  Be- 
dingungen  unterlauft  mit  Absicht  die  traditionell  misogyne  Auslegung  dieser 
und  anderer  Textstellen,  an  denen  der  Humanist  mit  ironischer  Nachsicht  die 
asketischen  Obsessionen  insbesondere  des  Kirchenvaters  Hieronymus  aufspiirt 
{Ann.  ad  1  Tim  2,6;  1  Tim  2,22;  1  Tim  3,5;  1  Tim  3,13;  1  Tim  5,3;  1  Tim  5,18; 
Tit  1,15;  Tit  1,21  U.23;  T^V  2,8  u.lO  L5  VI  932,  933,  934,  935,  939,  940-41, 
966,  967,  969).  Das  so  verstandene  paulinische  Votum  fiir  die  Ehelosigkeit 
wird  jedoch  schon  in  den  Annotationes  zum  Novum  Testamentum  1519  "iuxta  in- 
dulgentiam"  unter  Hinweis  auf  die  besondere  historische  Situation  interpre- 
tiert  ("lam  illud,  quamvis  non  est  proprium  huius  instituti,  tamen  obiter 
admonuisse  profuerit  'bonum'  hie  accipi  pro  'commodo'  .  .  .  neque  enim  hoc 
quaerebatur  a  Corinthiis  opinor,  an  fas  esset  uxorem  ducere,  sed  an  expediret 
eo  rerum  statu  [!]  matrimonii  vinculis  illigari"  A^T  11,363)  und  mit  der  beson- 
deren  Situation  der  zahlenmafiig  sehr  kleinen  ersten  Gemeinden  begriindet 
{Ann.  ad  1  Cor  7,1-4  A^r  11,320-21;  ad  1  Tim  3,2-3  NI  11,566).  Die  exege- 
tischen  Bemiihungen  von  Erasmus  zielen  zweifellos  darauf,  Ehe  und  Zolibat 
aus  ihrer  dogmatischen  Hierarchisierung  zu  losen,  um  sie  als  gesellschaftliche 
Ordnungselemente  im  Sinn  der  "pietas  Christiana"  fiir  die  "Ecclesia"  als  Ge- 


BARBARA   MARX  645 

samtheit  des  "hominum  consortio"  {LB  VI, 696)  verfiigbar  zu  machen.  Dies 
zeigt  der  entwaffnende  Nachsatz  zur  beruhmten  Kommentierung  von  Eph  5,32, 
wo  Erasmus,  hier  allerdings  wiederum  von  Valla  angeregt,  den  sakramentalen 
Charakter  der  Ehe  bestritt^^:  "neque  enim  in  hoc  magnum  est  sacramentum, 
si  vir  iungatur  uxori,  quod  et  apud  ethnicos  fieri  consuevit"  (A^/ 11,533).  Diese 
sowohl  von  Orthodoxen  wie  von  Reformern  als  Abwertung  der  Ehe  mifiver- 
standene  Anmerkung^^  strich  Erasmus  zugunsten  einer  kirchentreuen  Erkla- 
rung  im  Novum  Testamentum  1519  {NT  11,428):  zu  Recht  konnte  er,  dessen 
Encomium  matrimonii  nicht  zufallig  in  der  Folge  des  Novum  Instrumentum  1517 
und  1518  gleich  dreimal  aufgelegt  wurde,^*  schliefilich  behaupten:  "laudatum 
est  a  me  matrimonium  ad  invidiam  usque"  {LB  IX, 227).  So  diirfen  denn  die 
philologischen  Anstrengungen,  im  Bibeltext  selbst  eine  Verankerung  der  Ehe 
als  primar  christlicher  Institution  auszumachen,  nicht  nur  als  Ausdruck  einer 
letztlich  traditionellen  Polemik  gegen  den  Zolibat  und  seinen  Mifibrauch  ver- 
standen  werden;  vielmehr  sind  hier  die  "Urvater",  die  Apostel  selbst,  als  Zeu- 
gen  und  Garanten  dafiir  aufgerufen,  dafi  die  Neuordnung  des 
Gesellschaftlichen  nach  evangelischen  "praecepta"  im  reformerischen  Zugriff 
auf  die  Familie  beginnt:  die  Sonderstellung  der  Geistlichen,  die  rechtliche 
Uberschneidung  und  Hierarchisierung  von  Heiratsversprechen  und  Zolibats- 
gebot  erscheint  in  dieser  Perspektive  vorwiegend  als  ein  Element  der  Unord- 
nung. 

Schon  Valla,  dessen  Schrift  De  professione  religiosorum  sich  vor  allem  mit  dem 
theologischen  Sonderstatus  des  Zolibats  auseinandersetzte,  hatte  bereits  1  Cor 
9,5-6  (24A^7",865)  als  Beleg  fur  die  Verehelichung  der  Apostel  benannt.^^  1516 
hatte  Erasmus  den  Vorganger  nur  stellvertretend  zitiert  (A7 11,469),  um  sich 
schliefilich  1519  zur  eigenen  Position  zu  bekennen  (A^T  11,336).  Die  moglichen 
Implikationen  fiir  den  Status  des  Apostels  Paulus  an  dieser  Stelle  und  an  an- 
deren,  wie  in  Phil  4,3  (cf.  Valla,  ANT,S79),  hat  Erasmus  in  spateren  Aus- 
gaben  {LB  VI, 706)  gemildert,^^  ebenso  wie  die  erst  1519  eingefugte  Annotatio 
zu  1  Cor  7,7  ("volo  autem  omnes  manere  sicut  me  ipsum"),  die  auf  die  offen- 
sichtliche  Unlogik  einer  asketischen  Vorschrift  verweisen  soil.  Zu  seiner  Uber- 
setzung  "Nam  velim  omnes  homines  esse  ut  ipse  sum"  notierte  der  Verfasser: 
"Exponit  enim  quid  dixerit  secundum  indulgentiam,  alioqui  vellem  inquit  omnes 
qui  habent  uxores  in  totum  abstinere  ab  illis,  vel  ex  hoc  loco  coniicere  licet 
Paulo  fuisse  coniugem,  posteaquam  de  coniugatis  agens  sui  facit  mentio- 
nem"(7V7"  11,363).  Die  Archaologie  des  "simplicitatis  Evangelicae  praeceptum" 
(Bude,  in  CM^ IV, 6/22),  die  Erasmus  mit  den  Mitteln  der  humanistischen  Phi- 
lologie  betreibt,  macht  erst  dessen  Freisetzung  in  einem  reformerischen  oder 
gar  utopischen  Impetus  moglich.  Von  daher  erscheint  auch  die  punktuelle 
Ubereinstimmung  der  kritischen  Ergebnisse  in  den  Annotationes  mit  den  "Chris- 
tiani  ritus"  im  Inselstaat  der  Utopier  nicht  mehr  befremdlich:  sie  beruht  auf 
der  These,  dafi  die  wahre  "hominis  natura"  sich  mit  der  "Christi  philosophia" 
deckt  {Ann.  ad  Mt  11,30  A'^ni,43).  Dafi  Erasmus  das  kritische  Potential  im 


646  HUMANISTISCHE  PHILOLOGIE,    BIBELEXEGESE  UND  UTOPISCHE  LITERATUR 

Novum  Testamentum  von  1519  nochmals  erhohte,  bestatigt  nur  einen  weitrei- 
chenden  Konsensus,  wie  er  sich  nicht  zuletzt  im  Programm  Frobens  von  1518 
nachdriicklich  widerspiegelt:  die  dritte  Ausgabe  des  Encomium  matrimonii  wurde 
gleichzeitig  mit  den  Annotationes  in  Novum  Testamentum  fertiggestellt,  die  Wie- 
derauflage  der  Utopia  am  Jahresende  verstarkte  nur  diesen  propagandistischen 
Zusammenhang. 

In  der  Utopia  sind  die  "sacerdotes"  verheiratet,  ihre  Zahl  ist  iiberdies  gering 
(CPT IV, 226/1 9-21):  bekanndich  hatte  Erasmus  seine  Befiirwortung  der  Prie- 
sterehe,  die  allerdings  erst  1519  explizit  vorgetragen  wurde,  mit  der  allzu  grofien 
Anzahl  von  Geistlichen  begriindet  {Ann.  ad  1  Cor  7,3  A'^T  11,321;  ad  1  Tim 
3,4  A^T  11,469).  Der  Zolibat  als  eine  aus  der  "evangelica  libertas"  heraus  prak- 
tizierte  freiwillige  Lebensform  von  Laien  {Ann.  ad  1  Cor  9,5  LB  VI, 706)  wird 
in  der  Utopie  ideologisch  neutralisiert  (CH^IV, 226/2  sqq.).  Auch  Frauen,  ins- 
besondere  Witwen,  konnen  im  Inselstaat  des  Morus  als  Priester  fungieren  {CW 
IV, 228/15-18):  so  hatte  Erasmus  schon  1506  die  Textstelle  Ro  16,1  gedeutet 
{Inedit,  348;  A7 11,454),  schliefilich  sogar  den  Ehefrauen  der  Bischofe  und  Dia- 
kone  diese  Funktion  zugesprochen  (ad  1  Tim  3,11  LB  VI, 936;  cf.  ASD 
XI, 2, 226).  Eine  wichtige  Parallele  betrifft  die  Wahl  der  Priester  {CW 
IV, 226/25).  Erasmus  war  hier  seit  1506  Valla  gefolgt  in  der  Ubersetzung  Ac 
1,26  "annumeratus"  als  "cooptatus"  {Inedit,  245;  NI  11,516);  Ac  14,23  ("cum 
constituissent  illis")  heifit  in  der  Neuiibersetzung  "cum  suffragiis  creassent  illis" 
{Inedit,  279;  A^/ 1,285;  cf.  Valla,  ^A'r,847),  mit  dem  Kommentar  "ut  intel- 
ligamus  'suffragiis  delectos'"  (A7 11,389).  Die  Vulgatastelle  zur  geistlichen  Or- 
dination 2  Cor  8,19  "ordinatus,"  bereits  von  Valla  berichtigt  in  "creatus  vel 
electus"  {ANT,S73),  wird  in  gleicher  Weise  von  Erasmus  verstanden  als  "elec- 
tus  sive  suffragiis  creatus"  (erst  1519,  A^T  11,378).  Ebenso  wie  die  Heiratspraxis 
garantiert  der  Wahlmodus  durch  den  "populus"  die  gesellschaftliche  Einbin- 
dung  der  Geistlichkeit,  die  Erasmus  als  eine  lange  "consuetudo"  der  Kirche 
einschatzt,  auch  wenn  er  sie  spaterhin  eher  negativ  bewertete  {Ann.  ad  Ac  6,6 
LB  VI, 459).  Auch  in  der  Utopia  (Cl^ IV, 218/20  sqq.)  hatte  die  rehgiose  Tole- 
ranz  ihre  Grenze  ebendort,  wo  sie  die  Paraphrasis  m  Ro  12,1  setzte:  "Ordine 
constat  res  publica,  ea  praetextu  religionis  turbari  non  debet"  {LB  VII, 820). 

Die  auffalligste  Ubereinstimmung  zwischen  Exegese  und  utopischer  Lite- 
ratur  bezieht  sich  auf  die  Institution  von  Ehe  und  patriarchalischer  Familien- 
struktur.  Wie  Morus  trat  auch  Erasmus  fiir  die  von  Jesus  selbst  verbiirgte 
Unaufloslichkeit  der  ehelichen  Bindung  ein,  die  er  1519  wieder  starker  be- 
tonte.^^  Doch  sein  beriihmtes  Pladoyer  fiir  die  Ehescheidung  {Ann.  ad  1  Cor 
7,42  A^T  11,325-34),^^  sein  gerade  auch  1519  sehr  viel  polemischeres  Eintreten 
fiir  die  Moglichkeit  einer  Wiederheirat  {Ann.  ad  1  Tim  3,3  A^T  11,469  sqq.) 
im  Namen  der  "aequitas  naturalis"  forderten  nun  selbst  das  Utopische  und 
sprengten  damit  bewuftt  die  Grenzen  der  Exegese:  "Neque  vero  statim  hie  re- 
clamet  aliquis:  'O  coelum,  o  terra!  Iste  convellit  decreta  Ecclesiae.'  Primum 
non  convello,  ut  ante  testatus  sum,  sed  disputandi  gratia  confero"  (A^T  11,326). 


BARBARA   MARX  647 

Die  Ausgrenzung  aus  dem  theologischen  Diskurs  "disputandi  gratia"  durch  die 
rhetorische  Aufbereitung  der  Annotationes  als  deklamatorische  Stiicke^^  legt  zu- 
gleich  eine  Verteidigungsstrategie  fest:  Literatur  und  Theologie  decken 
grundsatzlich  getrennte  Bereiche  ab.  Die  Kritiker  des  Erasmus,  wie  der  auf- 
merksame  Spalatin,  der  in  der  Bearbeitung  von  i?o  5,12  schon  vor  Erscheinen 
der  Paraphrasis  eine  theologische  Liicke  im  Hinblick  auf  die  Erbsiinde  aus- 
gemacht  hatte,  rekurrieren  ausschliefilich  auf  die  "dogmata,"  nicht  auf  die 
kritischen  Exkurse  nach  der  Art  des  Encomium  Moriae.  Doch  die  Grenziiber- 
schreitung,  in  der  Utopia  selbst  unter  Strafe  gestellt  (CPKIV,  147/9-13),  hatte, 
in  einem  metaphorischen  Sinne,  fiir  Erasmus  in  der  Zeit  zwischen  dem  Novum 
Instrumentum  und  dem  Novum  Testamentum  besonders  nahe  gelegen.  Sicher  aber 
nicht  fiir  seinen  Freund  Morus,  dessen  Utopia  so  gut  wie  keine  biblischen  An- 
leihen  enthielt,^^  wahrend  seine  spateren  apologetischen  Werke  in  der  englis- 
chen  Ubertragung  von  Bibelstellen  um  philologische  Sorgsamkeit  nicht  besorgt 
waren,  auch  nicht  in  der  Benutzung  des  erasmischen  Neuen  Testaments. ^^  Als 
"Theologe"  verteidigte  Morus  die  gleichen  dogmatischen  Positionen,  die  sein 
hterarischer  Entwurf,  scheinbar,  zur  Diskussion  gestellt  hatte. 


Ill 


Dafi  die  Literatur  sich  selbst  als  Januskopf  der  Exegese  darstellen  kann,  indem 
sie  das  Doppeldeutige,  das  Zensurierte  zur  Sprache  bringt,  setzte  theologische 
Freiraume  voraus,  die  vom  Beginn  der  Zwanziger  Jahre  an  zunehmend  be- 
setzt  wurden.  Auch  Morus  griff  noch  in  eine  Kontroverse  ein,  die,  vom  phi- 
lologischen  Apparat  Vallas  ausgehend,^^  als  gelost  betrachtet  werden  konnte: 
seiner  Empfehlung,  in  der  Ubersetzung  des  griechischen  7ipeaPuTepo(;  nach  der 
Wiirde  des  Amts  ("presbyter")  oder  nach  dem  Alter  ("senior")  zu  differenzieren, 
war  Erasmus  schon  1509  gefolgt,  indem  er  an  den  fraglichen  Stellen  Ac  15,4; 
15,6;  15,22-23;  16,4;  21,18  den  Terminus  "presbyter"  gewahlt  und  diesen, 
trotz  der  Korrektur  nach  der  Vulgata  im  Novum  Instrumentum,  1519  endgiiltig 
bestatigt  hatte  {Inedit,  280,  281,  283,  298).  Die  Philologie  lenkt  hier  zugleich 
die  Exegese:  Erasmus  bestimmt  den  Priester  nicht  nach  seiner  Stellung  in- 
nerhalb  der  Gemeindehierarchie,  sondern  allein  auf  Grund  seiner  spirituellen 
Berufung.  Die  Ausnahmestellung  des  "presbyter"  ist  durch  seine  Aufgabe:  die 
Verkiindigung  des  Evangeliums  legitimiert;^'^  vor  allem  den  ersten  Timo- 
theusbrief  legt  Erasmus  im  Sinn  dieser  Predigerfunktion  des  Bischofs  {Ann.  ad 
1  Tim  3,2  M  566-67;  ad  1  Tim  4,14  A^r  11,472)  und  ihrer  Defmition  als  "ho- 
norarium munus"^  aus.  Die  traditionelle,  auch  bei  Valla  verbiirgte  Gleich- 
stellung  von  "presbyter"  und  "episcopus,"  nochmals  in  der  Diskussion  von 
auve7riax67roi(;  "coepiscopis"  {Phil  1,1  NI,  535)  angeschnitten,  bot  dariiber  hin- 
aus  Ansatze  zur  zeitkritischen  Reflexion.  Schon  1516,  in  der  Annotatio  zu  1 


648  HUMANISTISCHE  PHILOLOGIE,   BIBELEXEGESE  UND  UTOPISCHE  LITERATUR 

Pe  5,3,  hatte  Erasmus  gefolgert,  dafi  es  urspriinglich  nur  wenige  Priester, 
namlich  ebenso  viele  wie  Bischofe  gab;  1519  fiigte  er  eine  scharfe  Kritik  an 
den  sozialen  und  okonomischen  Prarogativen  des  Priesterstands  hinzu  {NT 
11,533).  Das  argumentum  zur  Paraphrasis  des  Timotheusbriefs  iiber  die  Bi- 
schofswiirde  machte  die  gesellschafdiche  Abdankung  geradezu  zur  Voraus- 
setzung  des  geisdichen  Aintes:  "Proinde  mihi  non  paulo  difficilius  videtur  hodie 
praesulem  fidum  et  incorruptum  agere  .  .  .  verum  multo  magis,  quod  plerique 
praeter  dispensationem  evangelicae  doctrinae,  quae  praecipua  ac  peculiaris  est 
episcopi  functio,  prophanae  quoque  ditionis  administratione  sint  onerati"  {LB 
VII,  1034). 

Diese  Exegese  stiefi  zunehmend  auf  Ablehnung  der  Interpreten  aus  dem  einen 
wie  dem  anderen  religiosen  Lager,  die  sich  zugleich  die  philologischen  Er- 
gebnisse  des  Novum  Testamentum  zueigen  machten.  Caietanus,  der  die  Uber- 
setzung  "presbyter"  befurwortete,  argumentiert  1532  gleichwohl  in  einem 
entgegengesetzten  Sinn  fiir  die  Fiihrungsposition  des  Bischofs  "praeesse  enim 
est  Episcoporum  seu  superintendentium"  (ad  1  Tim  5,17)  und  den  ihm  zu- 
stehenden  "duplex  honor,"  "videlicet  reverentialis  officii  et  subventionis."^^ 
Wahrend  der  romische  Kardinal  sich  auf  die  Vulgata  stiitzte,  legte  Bullinger 
in  seinem  Kommentar  zu  den  Acta  von  1533  und  den  paulinischen  und  ka- 
nonischen  Epistolae  von  1534  den  Sprachgebrauch  des  Novum  Testamentum 
zugrunde,  doch  mit  dem  Ziel,  aus  der  spirituellen  Autoritat  den  Fiihrungs- 
anspruch  eines  Kollektivs  von  "verbi  duces,"  von  "episcopi  sive  veritatis  doc- 
tores"^''  im  Hinblick  auf  die  Gesamtheit  des  "coetus  Christi  fidelium,"  der 
"ecclesia"  zu  beglaubigen.  1  Tim  4,14  "cum  impositione  manuum  presbyteri" 
hatte  Erasmus  interpretiert  als  Gabe,  "cum  impositione  manuum,  authoritate 
sacerdotii"  {Inedit,  456)  den  Heiligen  Geist  weiterzugeben  {LB  VI, 942).  Caie- 
tanus iibernimmt  die  Textkorrektur  "presbyteri":  "presbyterii,"  weil  ihm  hier 
die  Beschreibung  der  Priesterweihe  vor  Augen  steht  "ad  significandum  im- 
positionem  non  esse  humanae  manus,  sed  manus  sacrae,  manus  sacerdotalis 
officii. "^^  Bullinger  wiederum  kommentiert  die  Erasmusiibersetzung  als  geist- 
liche  Ordination  "manuum  seniorum  impositio"  und  verv^eist  auf  den  Wahl- 
modus  in  seiner  Ziiricher  Gemeinde,  in  der  das  Presbyterium  "e  doctis  et  verbi 
ministris,  e  senatoribus  item  et  diaconis,  hoc  est  e  plebe  aliquot"  gewahlt 
wird.^^  Die  Prarogativen  des  Geschlechts,  des  Alters,  der  theologischen  Bil- 
dung,  die  Erasmus  von  der  evangelischen  Berufung  des  "presbyter"  strikt  ab- 
getrennt  hatte,  werden  nunmehr,  mit  Hilfe  des  erasmischen  Bibeltextes  und 
der  Philologie  selbst  wieder  eingefiihrt.  Denn  Bullinger  kann  sich  auf  Budes 
Commentarii  linguae  Graecae  von  1530  berufen,  um  dem  Prediger  zusatzlich  den 
Status  des  Gemeindealtesten  zuriickzugewinnen:  die  "presbyteri"  sind  die 
"omnes  in  ecclesia  seniores,  quibus  habenae  administrationis  commissae  sunt" 
(ad  1  Tim  5,17),  die  "in  lege  Dei  docti,  multa  quoque  exercitatione  in  rebus 
divinis  versati  veluti  senatores  et  legis  consulti  sunt  populi  Christiani"  (ad  1 
Pe  5,1);*^  ahnlich  begreift  auch  Brenz  das  "Konzil"  der  "presbyteri"  (ad  Ac 


BARBARA   MARX  649 

15,22-23)  zugleich  als  Organ  der  "senatores  Ecclesiae  Hierosolymitanae."'*^ 
Zwischen  diesen  Fronten,  die  sich  im  Lager  der  Reformation  spater  noch- 
mals,  etwa  zwischen  Beza  und  Castellio,  herausbildeten,  mufite  die  Exegese 
des  Erasmus  ihr  utopisches  Potential  weitgehend  einbiifien.  Es  konnte  nur  noch 
dort  zur  Wirkung  kommen,  wo  die  religiosen  Grenzen,  in  den  Zwanziger  und 
Dreifiiger  Jahren,  noch  fliefiend  waren:  wie  in  Italien.  Bei  dem  Verfasser  einer 
itaUenischen  Bibeliibersetzung,  dem  Florentiner  Antonio  BrucioU,  wurde  1555 
ein  Exemplar  des  Novum  Testamentum  konfisziert;*^  doch  seine  italienische  Ver- 
sion des  Neuen  Testaments  von  1530,  die  dem  Kardinal  Ercole  Gonzaga  ge- 
widmet  war,  blieb,  trotz  zahlreicher,  vor  allem  lexikalischer  Anleihen  bei 
Erasmus,  eine  unabhangige  Arbeit.  Eher  noch  von  den  spateren  Bibelkom- 
mentaren  her  wird  die  direkte  Nahe  zum  Text  und  zu  den  Annotationes  des 
Erasmus,  etwa  in  1  Cor  7,1,  1  Cor  7,7,  1  Tim  3,2-3,*^  deutlich,  auch  und  vor 
allem  im  Insistieren  auf  dem  Predigeramt  des  Bischofs:  Brucioli  iibersetzt  stets 
"prete."  Gerade  an  dieser  Stelle  werden  indessen  auch  die  reformatorischen 
Einfliisse  wirksam,  wo  der  Bischof  "ministro  del  verbo"  genannt  wird,  "per 
il  ministerio  del  quale  Iddio  governa  il  populo  suo,"**  den  Priestern  2ils  "pre- 
dicatori  del  verbo"  nahegelegt  wird:  "importa  con  quale  eruditione  et  integrita 
di  vita  sieno  dotati  i  preti,  cioe  vecchi  e  consoli,  a  dire  cosi,  del  popolo  Chris- 
tiano."*^  Der  padagogische  Impetus,  das  humanistische  Bildungssystem  selbst 
in  eine  Schule  Christi  umzuwandeln,  "separare  lo  evangelio  et  dottrina  della 
fede  dalla  dottrina  della  legge  et  dalla  dottrina  de'  costumi,"*^  erscheint  in- 
dessen noch  nah  genug  an  Budes  Position  und  der  Utopia  angesiedelt,  wenn- 
gleich  Brucioli  radikal  iiber  die  erasmischen  Standpunkte  hinausgeht. 

Denn  das  Werk  des  Morus  kannte  der  Florentiner:  es  traf  auf  seine  eigene 
utopische  Imagination,  die  er  1526  in  den  Dialogi  entfaltet  hatte.  In  den  Gespra- 
chen  iiber  die  ideale  Staatsform  in  den  "Dialogi"  VI  und  VII  wird  die  Utopia 
verschliisselt,  aber  doch  unter  einem  eindeutigen  Etikett  vorgestellt:  ihre  Ge- 
setze  iiber  die  Wahl  der  Priester  sind  vorbildlich  auch  fiir  die  imaginare  Re- 
publik  der  Dialogi,  weil  sie  den  Vorschriften  der  apostolischen  Urgemeinde 
entsprechen.*^  Doch  fiir  die  Darstellung  des  Wahlmodus  selbst  hat  sich  Bru- 
cioli, wie  auch  seine  eigenen  spateren  Kommentare  z\x  Ac  14,23  und  2  Cor 
8,19  belegen,*^  an  die  philologischen  Ergebnisse  des  Erasmus  gehalten.  Die 
Textstelle  selbst  paraphrasiert  nun  keineswegs  die  Utopia,  sondern  eben  den 
"prisco  ordine  dell'apostolica  Chiesa"  aus  Versatzstiicken  des  ersten  Petrus- 
briefs,  der  zumindest  teilweise  in  der  Lektiire  des  Erasmus  steht: 

Di  poi,  avendo  umilmente  cosi  orato,  i  cittadini  eleggono  quegli  che  vog- 
liono  e  che  paiono  loro  piCi  degni  e  atti,  e  poste  sopra  di  loro  le  mani 
gli  confermano  e  commendano  al  popolo.  E  questi  sono  i  loro  episcopi 
e  i  loro  pastori,  che  col  verbo  di  Dio  e  non  di  ciance  gli  pasceno.  E  questi 
sono  quegli  che  ottimamente  conoscono  le  pecore  lore,  e  da  quelle  sono 
conosciute,  e  tutti  questi  tali  ministri  sono  vecchi  e  quegli  che  piii  avanti 


650  HUMANISTISCHE  PHILOLOGIE,   BIBELEXEGESE  UND  UTOPISCHE  LITERATUR 

intendono  delle  cose  di  Dio  che  gli  altri  e  piu  notabili  per  bonta,  perche 
gli  altri  con  Tessemplo  e  con  la  santita  possono  ammaestrare.  .  .  .  Ne 
di  tali  ministri  si  fanno  mai  quegli  che  non  sono  atti  a  poter  indirizzare 
col  verbo  di  Dio  nella  santa  via  di  tanta  divina  religione.  .  .  ."^^ 

Hier  hatte  die  Literatur  die  Philologie  wieder  eingeholt. 


Anmerkungen 


*Untersuchung  durchgefiihrt  mit  Unterstiitzung  der  DFG 

1.  P.  R.  Allen,  "Utopia  and  European  Humanism:  The  Function  of  the  Prefatory 
Letters  2ind  Verses,"  in:  Studies  in  the  Renaissance  10,  1963,  101. 

2.  AE  II,  10-16. 

3.  AE  II,  126-36. 

4.  AE  II,  354;  359;  380;  576;  III,  52;  56-57. 

5.  AE  II,  339;  371;  420-21;  438  sqq.;  H.  Holeczek,  Humanistische  Bibelphilologie  als 
Rejormproblem  bei  Erasmus  von  Rotterdam,  Thomas  More  und  William  Tyndale,  Leiden  1975, 
180-85. 

6.  AE  II,  576. 

7.  AE  III,  238-40. 

8.  Allen,  "Utopia"  (s.  A.  1)  104-6;  D.  O.  McNeil,  Guillaume  Bude  and  Humanism  in 
the  Reign  of  Francis  I,  Geneve  1975,  50-52;  diese  Interpretation  der  Utopia  und  ihre  Nahe 
zu  Erasmus  wird  von  J.  H.  Hexter  in  CWIY,  LXIV-LXXVII  diskutiert. 

9.  De  Optimo  reip.  statu  deque  nova  insula  Utopia  libellus  .  .  .  Th.  Mori .  .  .,  Basileae,  Mense 
Decembri  An.M.D.XVIII,  c.  275. 

10.  AE  III,  255. 

11.  AE  III,  445. 

12.  J.  B.  Payne,  "Erasmus  and  Lefevre  d'Etaples  as  Interpreters  of  Paul,"  in:  Archiv 
fur  Reformations geschichte  65,  1974,  58-59,  66. 

13.  "Concio"  als  Synonym  fiir  "ecclesia"  war  schon  in  Vallas  Elegantiae  IV  47  be- 
handelt:  H.  Holeczek,  Humanistische  Bibelphilologie  (s.  A.  5)  87-88. 

14.  De  Optimo  reip.  statu,  (s.  A.  9)  cc.  330-31. 

15.  V.  jedoch  CM^  IV,  CLIV-CLV. 

16.  Der  Topos  der  "Spiegelverkehrtheit"  wird  auch  von  den  Korrespondenten  des 
Erasmus  mit  dieser  religiosen  Intention  benutzt,  so  von  Glareanus  am  5.8.1517,  AE 
III,  36. 

17.  AE  II,  141-45. 

18.  Diese  lafit  sich  noch  nachvollziehen  in  den  unterschiedlichen  Wertungen  von 
Holeczek,  Humanistische  Bibelphilologie  {&.  A.  5)  79-100;  J.  H.  Bentley,  "Erasmus' ^n- 
notationes  in  Novum  Testamentum  and  the  Textual  Criticism  of  the  Gospels,"  in:  Archiv  fiir 
Reformationsgeschichte  67,  1976,  33-53;  Bentley,  "Biblical  Philology  and  Christian  Hu- 
manism. Lorenzo  Valla  and  Erasmus  as  Scholars  of  the  Gospels,"  in:  Sixteenth  Century 
Journal  8,  1977,  9-28;  J.  Chomarat,  "Les  'Annotations'  de  Valla,  celles  d'Erasme  et  la 

grammaire,"  in:  Histoire  de  Vexegese  au  XVT  siecle,  ed.  O.  Fatio  — P.  Fraenkel,  Geneve 
1978,  202-28;  Bentley,  Humanists  and  Holy  Writ.  New  Testament  Scholarship  in  the  Renais- 
sance, Princeton,  N.J.  1983,  112  sqq. 


BARBARA   MARX  65I 


19.  Lorenzo  Valla,  Opera  omnia,  Basileae  1540,  repr.  Torino  1962,  217-18;  zu  den 
Elegantiae  w .  auchj.  Chomarat,  Grammaire  et  rhetorique  chez Erasme,  Paris  1981,  II,  225-65. 

20.  1506  und  wiederum  1519  hatte  Erasmus  hier  sogar  "ius"  eingesetzt  (H.  Gibaud, 
Un  Inedit  d'Erasme.  La  premiere  version  du  Nouveau  Testament  copiee  par  Pierre  Meghen 
1506-1509,  Angers  1982,  360;  NT,  363). 

21.  Bentiey,  "Biblical  PhUology"  (s.  A.  18)  20-21;  Bendey,  Humanists  {s.  A.  18)  52-53; 
Holeczek,  Humanistische  Bibelphilologie  (s.  A.  5)  83. 

22.  E.  V.  Telle,  Erasme  de  Rotterdam  et  le  septieme  sacrement,  Geneve  1954,  267  und 
2bl -92  passim;].  B.  Payne,  Erasmus.  His  Theology  of  Sacraments,  1970,  99-100,  112-21. 
Beide  Autoren  iibersehen,  dafi  schon  Valla  in  Eph  5,32  den  Einschub  "ego  autem  dico" 
auf  "de  Christo  et  de  Ecclesia"  {ANT,87S)  bezogen  hatte,  Erasmus  sich  seinerseits  auf 
den  Vorganger  stiitzte,  ihn  aber  nicht  namentlich  nannte  (NT  11,428);  die  Uberset- 
zung  "mysterium"  fur  "sacramentum"  ebenfalls  bei  Valla  ad  1  Tim  3,16  (^A'^T',882). 

23.  Responsio  ad  notationes  E.  Lei,  LB  IX, 225;  Apologia  respondens  adea  quae  lacobus  Lopis 
Stunica  taxaverat  in  prima  .  .  .  Novi  Testamenti  aeditione,  ASD  XI,  2,  212,  213;  H.  Schlin- 
gensiepen,  "Erasmus  als  Exeget  auf  Grund  seiner  Schriften  zu  Mathaus,"  in  Zeitschrift 

far  Kirchengeschichte  48,  1929,  27. 

24.  Encomium  matrimonii,  ASD  I,  5,  335-42;  cf.  Payne,  Erasmus  (s.  A.  22)  109  sqq. 

25.  Apologia,  ASD  XI,  2,184-87. 

26.  A.  Bludau,  Die  beiden  ersten  Erasmus-Ausgaben  und  ihre  Gegner,  Freiburg  i.  Br.  1902,  49. 

27.  1  Cor  7,10  hatte  Erasmus  1516  wiedergegeben  als  "at  coniugatis  dico,  non  ego, 
imo  Dominus:  uxor  a  viro  ne  separetur"  {NI  11,38),  wahrend  er  1519  wieder  den  Be- 
griff  der  Vulgata  "praecipio"  verwendete  {NT  1,363). 

28.  Telle,  Erasme  (s.  A.  22)  205-32;  Payne,  Erasmus  (s.  A.  22)  121-25. 

29.  Bludau,  Die  beiden  ersten  Erasmus-Ausgaben  (s.  A.  26)  49;  Bentiey,  "Erasmus'  An- 
notationes,""  (s.  A.  18)  42-43. 

30.  AE  II,  417-418;  cf.  auch  Bludau,  Die  beiden  ersten  Erasmus-Ausgaben,  57-58;  J. 
B.  Payne,  "Erasmus:  Interpreter  of  Romans,"  in:  Sixteenth  Century  Studies  and  Essays  2, 
1971,  12-14. 

31.  G.  Marc'hadour,  The  Bible  in  the  Works  of  Thomas  More,  V,  1972,  119-26. 

32.  A  Dialogue  Concerning  Heresies,  CW  Wl,  2,504-5,  689;  The  Confutation  of  Tyndale's 
Answer,  CP^VIII,  3,1267,  1349-52,  1360-61. 

33.  Holeczek,  Humanistische  Bibelphilologie  (s.  A.  5)  85-87;  cf.  Moms  CW  VI, 
1,286/7-25. 

34.  Payne,  Erasmus  (s.  A.  22)  105-9. 

35.  Die  Paraphrasis  zu  1  Tim  3,1  {LB  VII,  1043)  prazisiert:  "siquidem  episcopus  non 
tam  dignitatis  est  nomen  quam  officii,  quam  sollicitudinis,  sonat  enim  inspectorem  et 
commodis  aliorum  usibusque  prospicientem";  d\G  Ann.  ad  1  Thes  5,12  erganzt:  "Hunc 
locum  oportet  annotare  diligenter  episcopos  qui  exigunt  a  suis  summum  honorem,  cum 
ipsi  non  curent  praestare  suum  officium.  Paulus  iubet  eos  haberi  in  summo  honore, 
sed  propter  opus,  nee  propter  inanem  titulum,  hoc  est  laborantes,  praesidentes  in  Do- 
mino, non  cum  fastu,  admonentes,  docentes,  consolantes,  quod  proprium  est  episco- 
porum  munus"  {NT  11,458). 

36.  Evangelia  cum  commentariis  Rever.  D.  D.  Thomae  de  Vio  Caietani  Card.  Santi  Xisti,  Pa- 
risiis:  apud  lod.  Badium  Ascensium  et  loan.  Parvum  et  lozinnem  Roigny,  M.D. XXXII, 
AA,  174v. 

37.  In  Acta  Apostolorum  Heinrychi  Bullingeri  commentariorum  libri  VI,  Tiguri:  apud  Chris- 
tophorum  Froschoverum.  Mense  Augusto  Anno  M.D. XXXIII,  c.  187r  ad  Ac  15,22; 
c.  188v  ?id  Ac  15,23. 

38.  Evangelia  (s.A.  36)  AA,  173r. 


652  HUMANISTISCHE  PHILOLOGIE,   BIBELEXEGESE  UND  UTOPISCHE  LITERATUR 

39.  In  omnes  Apostolicas  Divi  videlicet  Pauli  XIIII.  et  VII.  Canonicas  commentarii  Heinrychi 
Bullingeri .  .  .,  Tiguri:  apud  Christophorum  Froschoverum  Anno  M.D.LVIII,  585  ad 
1  Tim4,H. 

40.  In  omnes  Apostolicas  .  .  .  commentarii,  591;  [II]  48. 

41.  Operum  Rev.  etclarissimi  Theologi  D.  loannis  Brentii,  t.  VII,  Tubingaeexc.  Georgius 
Gruppenbachius,  Anno  M.D.LXXXVIII,  289-90. 

42.  A.  Del  Col,  "II  controllo  della  stampa  a  Venezia  e  i  process!  de  Antonio  Brucioli 
(1548-1559),"  in:  Critica  storica  17,  1980,  467-71. 

43.  Nuovo  commento  di  Antonio  Brucioli  in  tutte  le  celesti  et  divine  Epistole  di  San  Paulo.  .  ., 
In  Venetia  nel  M.D.XLIIII,  c.  76ra  sqq.,  203vb  sqq.,  204va. 

44.  Nuovo  commento,  c.  203vb. 

45.  Nuovo  commento  di  Antonio  Brucioli  nelle  canonice  Epistole  di  San  lacopo,  di  San  Pietro, 
San  Giovanni  et  San  Giuda.  .  .,  In  Venetia  nel  M.D.XLIIII,  c.  26va;  zur  Abhangigkeit 
der  Kommentare  von  den  1530  erschienenen  Enarrationes  des  Bucerius:  W.  Melczer, 
"Antonio  Brucioli  et  les  influences  de  la  pensee  humaniste  sur  la  Reforme  en  Italic," 
in:  Reforme  et  Humanisme.  Actes  du  IV  Collogue,  Montpellier,  Octobre  1975,  Montpellier 
1977,  205. 

46.  Nuovo  commento  .  .  .  in  tutte  le  .  .  .  Epistole  di  San  Paulo  (s.  A.  43)  c.  221  va  ad  Tit  1,9. 

47.  Antonio  Brucioli,  Dialogi,  ed.  A.  Landi,  Napoli-Chicago  1982  (Corpus  Reforma- 
torum  Italicorum  4),  199/1269-200/1275. 

48.  Nuovo  commento  di  Antonio  Brucioli  ne'  divini  et  celesti  libri  Evangelici,  secondo  Mattheo, 
Marco,  Luca  et  Giovanni.  .  .,  In  Venetia  nel  M.D.XLII,  c.  21rb:  "Et  eleggevasi  esso  epis- 
copo  per  communi  suffragii  del  popolo,  quello  che  fusse  approvato  col  testimonio  degli 
ottimi,  et  a  questo  si  ponevano  le  mani  sopra,  commendandolo  al  popolo,  non  senza 
oratione  a  Iddio";  Nuovo  commento  .  .  .  in  tutte  le  .  .  .  Epistole  di  San  Paulo  (s.  A.  43)  1 18va. 

49.  Dialogi,  200/1288-1299. 


Das  Ringen  des  J.  L.  Vives  um 
eine  humanistische  Bildung:  1514-1519 

C.  Matheeussen 


In  den  1519  erschienenen  Opuscula  varia  (Lowen,  Dirk  Martens)  befinden 
sich  u.a.  folgende  Friihschriften  des  J.  L.  Vives:  De  initiis,  sectis  et  lau- 
dibus  philosophiae  (1519  verfasst),  die  erste  Veritas  fucata  und  Anima  senis 
(Widmungsbrief  vom  1.  April  1519),  Pompeius  fugiens  (April  1519);  es  handelt 
sich  hier  um  Erstausgaben.  Diese  Friihschriften  werden  1986  in  kritischer  Edi- 
tion (ed.  Matheeussen,  Fantazzi,  George)  in  Leiden  erscheinen,  als  erster  Teil 
einer  geplanten  Serie  "Ausgewahlter  Werke"  des  Vives. 

Dieser  kleine  Beitrag  ist  ein  kleines  Ergebnis  dieses  textkritischen  Bemii- 
hens.  Heute  mochte  ich  die  These  aufstellen,  dafi  die  Jahre  1514-1519  fur 
Vives  Lehrjahre  humanistischer  Selbstbildung  gewesen  sind.  Genauer  noch, 
vielleicht  sind  die  Jahre  1518-1519  fiir  seine  humanistische  Bildung  die  wich- 
tigsten  gewesen.  Man  konnte  sogar  behaupten,  dafi  Vives  spater  nicht  mehr 
im  gleichen  Mafie  ein  humanistischer  Uterarischer  Kiinstler  war. 

Wer  also,  sowie  ich  jetzt  vorhabe,  Begriffe  wie  "humanistischer  Autor,"  "hu- 
manistische Selbstbildung"  und  ahnliche  verwendet,  mufi  vorher  deutlich 
machen,  was  er  genau  mit  den  Termini  "Humanisten"  oder  "humanistisch" 
meint.  Obwohl  man  sich  iiber  diese  Termini  sehr  lange  streiten  kann,  und 
man  sich  schwer  dariiber  einigen  wird  — ich  behaupte  iibrigens  keineswegs, 
an  dieser  Stelle  diese  Einigkeit  zu  erreichen  — so  mufi  ich  meine  Wahl  hier 
begriinden,  damit  wir  uns  wenigstens  hie  et  nunc,  im  Rahmen  dieses  Beitrags, 
verstehen. 

Ich  verstehe  den  Humanismusbegriff  im  gleichen  Sinne,  wie  Prof.  Kristel- 
ler  ihn  versteht,  und  fange  demnach  mit  einem  Zitat  aus  seinem  Essay  Thomas 
Morus  als  Humanist  an.  Prof.  Kristeller  schreibt  dort:'  "Die  Humanisten  der 
Renaissance  waren  zumeist  und  vor  allem  klassische  Philologen,  mit  einer 
griindlichen  Ausbildung,  wie  sie  den  damaligen  Verhaltnissen  entsprach,  und 
Gelehrte  (wenn  auch  nicht  immer  Lehrer),  die  sich  mit  den  sogenannten  *studia 
humanitatis'  befafiten.  Dieser  Studienbereich  umfafite,  wie  wir  aus  zeitgenos- 
sischen  Zeugnissen  ersehen  konnen,  die  Gebiete  der  Grammatik,  Rhetorik, 


654  DAS  RINGEN   DES  J.    L.    VIVES 

Poesie,  Geschichte  und  Moralphilosophie,  wobei  diese  Begriffe  nicht  immer 
genau  so  verstanden  wurden,  wie  es  uns  heute  gelaiifig  ist.  Die  humanistische 
Gelehrsamkeit  stellt  nach  meiner  Auffassung  (d.h.  Kristellers  Auffassung)  nicht 
den  Gesamtbereich  der  Wissenschaft  und  der  Kultur  der  Renaissance  dar,  son- 
dern  nur  einen  begrenzten,  aber  wichtigen  Teil  davon.  Die  'studia  humani- 
tatis'  umfassen  nicht  die  Theologie  oder  Jurisprudenz,  nicht  die  philosophischen 
Facher  aufierhalb  der  Ethik,  nicht  die  Mathematik,  die  Naturwissenschaften 
oder  die  Medizin,  obwohl  es  fiir  den  einzelnen  Humanisten  durchaus  moghch 
war,  je  nach  seinen  personHchen  Interessen  oder  beruflichen  Aspirationen, 
die  humanistischen  Studien  mit  irgendwelchen  anderen  Fachern  zu  kombi- 
nieren." 

Vielleicht  am  lesenswertesten,  um  den  Humanisten  Vives,  d.h.  um  den  klas- 
sischen  Philologen  und  Gelehrten  Vives,  richtig  einzuschatzen  und  um  seine 
humanistische  Bildung  nachzupriifen,  sind  folgende  kleine  Schriften  aus  den 
Opuscula  varia:  De  initiis,  sectis  et  laudibus  philosophiae  einerseits,  und  die  zusam- 
mengehorende  Praefatio  in  Leges  Ciceronis  und  Aedes  legum  andererseits. 

De  initiis  ist  ein  straff  strukturierter  Essay:  Er  fangt  mit  der  Frage  nach  den 
Anfangen  der  Philosophic  an,  bietet  dann  eine  Sektion  iiber  den  Begriff  "Phi- 
losoph,"  hat  weiter  einen  Teil  iiber  die  verschiedenen  philosophischen  Schulen, 
und  schliefit  mit  einer  Lobpreisung  der  Philosophic.  Der  Quellenapparat  zu 
De  initiis  erweist  sich  als  sehr  eindrucksvoll:  In  den  Index  Iccorum  wurden  etwa 
40  Verfasser  aufgenommen,  im  Index  nominum  zahlt  man  ungefahr  1 70  Namen. 
Im  grofien  und  ganzen  stiitzt  sich  Vives  auf  zwei  Autoren:  Diogenes  Laertius 
und  Cicero.  Diese  Autoren  bilden  die  Basis  fiir  seine  Ausfiihrungen.  Oft  aber 
erweitert  Vives  die  dort  gebotene  Information  mit  Materialien  aus  anderen 
Quellen.  Ich  gebe  nur  ein  kleines  Beispiel.  Vives  schreibt  (§  3):  "Die  Perser 
hatten  ihre  magi,  von  denen  der  erste  Zoroaster  war."  Dies  entnahm  er  Di- 
ogenes Laertius  (1,  2);  er  fiigt  aber  hinzu:  "Zoroaster,  der  Mann,  der,  wie 
wir  lesen,  am  Tage  seiner  Geburt  gelachelt  hat."  Diesen  Zusatz  lesen  wir  bei 
Plinius  {nat.  7,72). 

Diese  und  zahlreiche  ahnliche  Detailbereicherungen  bilden  deutlich  nach- 
weisbare  Belege  fiir  Vives'  Kenntnis  klassischer  Quellen.  Da  sie  sich  in  dieser 
Jugendschrift  vorfinden,  sind  sie  Zeugen  seines  sich  entwickelnden  Humanis- 
mus  im  Sinne  der  Altphilologie  und  Gelehrsamkeit.  Diese  Kombinationslust 
scheint  mir  iibrigens  fiir  Vives  typisch  zu  sein:  Oft  kann  man  sein  Streben 
nach  enzyklopadischer  Anhaufung  bereits  in  seinen  Jugendwerken  wiederfm- 
den;  Vives  ist  ein  enzyklopadisch  angelegter  Gelehrter,  und  seine  Schrift  De 
disciplinis  wird  dies  spater  (1531)  am  deutlichsten  bezeugen. 

Indessen  aber  bleibt  De  initiis  deutlich  eine  Jugendschrift:  Zweifelsohne  ist 
hier  ein  Verfasser  am  Werk,  der  noch  spiirbar  um  seine  Bildung  als  klassi- 
scher Philologe  und  Gelehrter  ringt,  also  noch  an  seiner  humanistischen  Bil- 
dung arbeitet.  Dies  kann  ich  anhand  von  zwei  Beispielen  illustrieren.  Das  erste 
Beispiel  betrifft  die  eigentliche  Geschichte  der  Philosophic  in  De  initiis.  Be- 


C.    MATHEEUSSEN  655 

merkenswert  ist  dort  nicht  nur,  dafi  dieser  Abrifi  sich  auf  die  antike  Philosophic 
beschrankt,  sondern  auch,  dafi  in  dieser  Geschichte  der  antiken  Philosophic, 
nur  von  den  griechischen  Schulen  und  Philosophen,  bis  auf  Cameades  (gestorben 
129-128  vor  Christi  Geburt),  die  Rede  ist.  Das  heifet,  dafi  Cicero  diese  Uber- 
sicht  der  Schulen  eigendich  hatte  schrciben  konnen  (und  tatsachlich  ist  Cicero 
oft  als  Quelle  erwahnt  worden).  Man  hat  den  Eindruck,  dafi  Vives  zeitlich 
nicht  iiber  Cicero  hinausgehen  wollte  oder  konnte,  obwohl  seine  Hauptquelle 
(Diogenes  Laertius)  ihm  dazu  die  Moglichkeit  bot  (e.g.  9,  1 15-16).  Vives'  Ge- 
schichte der  Philosophic  endet  mit  einer  Schule,  die  zur  Zeit  Ciceros  noch  leben- 
dig  war;  man  liest  in  De  initiis  nichts  iiber  die  Neuplatoniker,  Plotinus,  Seneca, 
die  Patristik,  noch  iiber  die  mittelalterliche  Philosophic,  obwohl  Vives  Seneca 
damals  wenigstens  kannte,  er  auch  Eusebius  als  Quelle  erwahnt  und  sogar 
ein  wahres  Bekenntnis  zum  Aristotelismus  ausspricht,  was  ihn  zweifelsohne 
zu  einer  Aussage  uber  die  Scholastik  hatte  fiihren  konnen. 

Das  zweite  Beispiel  fiir  seine  damals  noch  im  Werden  begriffene  huma- 
nistische  Bildung  hat  mit  der  Frage  zu  tun,  ob  De  initiis  cine  der  ersten  neu- 
zeitlichen  Geschichten  der  Philosophic  darstellt,  cine  Idee,  die  seit  Majansius 
(der  sich  auf  Jacob  Brucker  stiitzt)  fast  Gemeingut  ist  in  der  Vives-Literatur, 
und  z.B.  bei  Noreiia  zu  folgender  Aussage  gesteigert  worden  ist,  wo  er  iiber 
De  initiis  sagt:  "One  of  the  first  modern  sketches  of  a  critical  history  of  philo- 
sophy."^ Meines  Erachtens  kann  man  diese  Wertung  als  ""critical  history"  je- 
doch  nicht  aufrechterhalten.  Die  Tatsache,  dafi  Diogenes  Laertius  die 
Hauptquelle  war,  sollte  hier  schon  cine  Warnung  sein.  Es  gibt  sicher  in  De 
initiis  Urteile  iiber  philosophische  Schulen,  aber  dies  geschieht  nicht  in  der 
Form  einer  historisch-kritischen  Uberpriifung  des  iiberlieferten  Materials 
(wozu  z.B.  die  Gelegenheit  bestand  anlafilich  der  Besprechung  des  Epicurus). 

Ich  verneine  nicht,  dafi  De  initiis,  als  Geschichte  der  Philosophic,  moglicher- 
weise  (ich  bin  nicht  imstande  mehr  dariiber  zu  sagen)  eine  kleine  Pionierschrift 
war;  aber  eine  hisioviscYv-kritische  Geschichte  ist  diese  Schrift  nicht.  Eine  solche 
Schrift  konnte  man  meiner  Ansicht  nach  im  Jahre  1518  auch  noch  nicht  von 
dem  sich  humanistisch  bildenden  Vives  erwarten.  De  initiis  ist  vielmehr  eine 
Schrift  eines  begeisterten  Entdeckers  (fiir  sich  selbst!)  der  griechischen  phi- 
losophischen  Tradition,  gewonnen  aus  einer  schon  breiten  Kenntnis  der  an- 
tiken Literatur.  In  diesem  Sinne  ist  De  initiis  ein  Beispiel,  unter  anderen  in 
den  Opuscula  varia,  das  davon  zeugt,  wie  Vives  damals  eine  humanistische  Bil- 
dung zu  erwerben  versuchte. 

Auch  die  Praefatio  in  Leges  Ciceronis  ist  interessant  als  Zeugnis  des  gelehrten 
Vives.  Besonders  trifft  dies  fiir  den  Schlufiteil  dieser  kleinen  Schrift  zu,  in  dem 
Vives  eine  Biographic  Ciceros  bietet.  Wie  er  selber  sagt,  hatte  Vives,  als  er 
diese  Biographic  Ciceros  schrieb,  schon  den  ganzen  Cicero  gelesen:  cum  summo 
studio  volumina  Ciceronis  omnia  lectitarem}  Vielleicht  kann  man  aus  solchen,  etwas 
versteckten  Aussagen  schliefien,  dafi  Vives'  humanistische  Bildung  vor  adlem 
Selbstbildung  war.  In  seiner  Biographic  Ciceros  will  Vives,  weil  Cicero  doch 


656  DAS  RINGEN   DES  J.    L.   VIVES 

ein  sehr  bekannter  Autor  ist,  nur  einiges  iiber  ihn  sagen,  "sed  ea  quae  non 
sint  vulgatis  scriptis  omnibus  cognita  atque  protrita.""^  Aus  welchen  Quellen 
hat  er  fiir  seine  in  der  Tat  interessante  Biographie  geschopft?  Aus  Cicero  selbst 
(und  dies  ist  nicht  gering!),  aber  weiter  auch  aus  Plutarchus,  Gellius,  Quin- 
tilianus,  luvenalis,  Silius  Italicus,  Cornelius  Nepos,  Sallustius,  Asconius  Pe- 
dianus,  Plinius,  Livius  und  Seneca  Rhetor. 

Wie  gesagt,  in  De  initiis  konnte  von  einer  kritischen  Geschichtsschreibung  nicht 
die  Rede  sein,  und  dort  stiitzte  sich  die  Darstellung  wesentlich  auf  zwei  Auto- 
ren.  Gibt  es  in  dieser  Hinsicht  eine  Weiterentwicklung  in  der  Vita  Ciceronis  der 
Praefatio'^  Man  kann  feststellen,  dafi  Vives  hier  als  kritischer  Gelehrter  Fort- 
schritte  gemacht  hat.  Die  Vita  Ciceronis  bietet  einen  personhchen  Aufbau,  in 
dem  die  auf  zahlreiche  Quellen  gestiitzten  Bausteine  ein  gut  durchdachtes  Gan- 
zes  darbieten:  Herkunft,  literarische  Personlichkeit,  letzte  Lebensjahre. 
Merkwurdig  beziiglich  dieser  letzten  Lebensjahre  ist  die  Stelle,  in  der  Vives 
eine  Liste  von  Freunden  Ciceros  gibt,  die  schon  vor  Cicero  gestorben  waren; 
diese  Liste  zeugt  von  einer  grofien  Gelehrsamkeit  und  Kompilationsfahigkeit, 
weil  Vives  sie,  soweit  ich  weifi,  nirgendwo  vorgefunden  hat.  Auch  die  kriti- 
sche  Geisteshaltung  ist  starker  entwickelt.  Z.B.  wird  beziiglich  der  Herkunft 
nicht  Silius  Italicus  gefolgt,  und  zwar  mit  dem  Argument:  "Dicit  poetice  magis 
quam  historice."^ 

Wenn  Vives  Cicero  als  Dichter  beurteilt,  spielt  zweifelsohne  seine  Begei- 
sterung  eine  zu  grofie  Rolle,  aber  nichtsdestoweniger  benutzt  er  das  richtige 
Prinzip  einer  kritischen  Methode:  ex  unguibus  leonem,  d.h.  die  Beurteilung  des 
Dichters  Cicero  soil  sich  nur  auf  die  iiberlieferten  Fragmente  stiitzen. 
Schliefilich,  als  letztes  Beispiel,  fragt  Vives  sich,  ob  man  zu  Recht  sagen  kann, 
Cicero  sei  timidus  ignavusque  gewesen;  zur  Unterstutzung  der  verneinenden  Ant- 
wort  fuhrt  er  quellenmafiig  unterbaute  Daten  an. 

Ein  Humanist  ist  aber  nicht  nur  ein  Gelehrter,  sondern  auch  ein  schopfe- 
rischer  Literat  und  Kiinstler,  und  zwar  in  aemulatio  mit  den  Antiken.  In  den 
Opuscula  varia  ist  in  dieser  Hinsicht  die  Aedes  legum  interessant.  Die  Aedes  legum 
ist  ein  Zeugnis  dieser  gelehrten  Kunst,  sogar  nach  dem  Empfinden  der  Zeitge- 
nossen  von  Vives  (was  vielleicht  damals,  sehr  typisch,  sogar  mehr  Bewunde- 
rung  erweckte)  wie  aus  einem  Schreiben  des  Thomas  Morus  an  Erasmus 
hervorgeht:  "esse  in  Aedibus  legum  .  .  .  abstrusiora  quaedam  quam  ut  pateant 
nisi  doctissimis."^  Mit  diesem  Satz  des  Thomas  Morus  ist  meines  Erachtens 
vor  allem  eine  wirklich  sehr  schwierige  Stelle  gemeint:  Das  Gebaude  der  Ge- 
setze  wird  von  einem  sehr  alten  Pfortner  iiberwacht,  und  Vives  hat  ihn  eine 
Rede  halten  lassen,  die  ganz  seinem  hohen  Alter  entspricht,  d.h.  die  Rede  ist 
ganz  Altlateinisch  abgefafit.  Dies  archaische  Latein  hat  Vives  aus  Terentius, 
Plautus,  Varro,  Gellius,  Nonius  und  Paulus  Diaconus.  Es  handelt  sich  hier 
um  die  kohaerente  Rekonstruktion,  von  Vives  selbst  quellentreu  geschaffen, 
einer  langst  vergangenen  Stufe  des  Lateinischen.  Eine  solche  Leistung  mufi 
Vives  stark  fasziniert  haben.  Denn  auch  in  der  Anima  senis  (wo  die  Seele  eines 


C.    MATHEEUSSEN  657 

Greises  agiert;  auch  die  Anima  senis  findet  sich  in  den  Opuscula  varia)  liest  man, 
daft  die  personifizierte  "Anima  senis"  Altlateinisch  zu  reden  anfing,  aber  in  der 
Anima  senis  ist  dem  Leser  das  Altlateinische  erspart  geblieben. 

In  den  Opuscula  varia  ist  Vives,  als  humanistischer,  literarischer  Kiinstler 
auch  eine  andere  Art  des  schopferischen  Einlebens  in  die  antike  Geschichte 
gelungen.  Ich  meine  hier  den  Pompeius  fugiens.  Vives  hat  sich  hier  in  die 
Gemiitsbeschaffenheit  des  Pompeius  nach  der  verlorenen  Schlacht  bei  Phar- 
salos  eingelebt.  Der  Pompeius  fagiens  bietet  einen  historisch  gut  unterbauten  dra- 
matischen  Monolog,  der  in  einer  Tragodie  von  Seneca  oder  Euripides  oder 
eines  Barockdramas  recht  am  Platze  sein  wiirde. 

Die  kleinen  Schriften,  von  denen  ich  gesprochen  habe,  sind  alle  1518-1519 
zu  datieren.  Sie  bestatigen  deutlich,  daft  Vives  damals  eine  grofte  Belesenheit 
in  der  antiken  Literatur  erworben  hatte.  Diese  Belesenheit  mufi  er  in  den  Jah- 
ren  1517-1519  erworben  haben,  in  den  Jahren  also,  wahrend  deren  er  eng 
mit  Lowen  in  Verbindung  stand. ^  Dies  geht  aus  einem  Vergleich  mit  seinen 
ersten  schopferischen  Publikationen  (Paris,  1514)  hervor.  Die  damals  verof- 
fentlichten  Arbeiten  sind  zwar  auch  wieder  in  die  Opuscula  varia  aufgenommen 
(und  sogar  stilistisch  und  sprachlich  deutlich  umgearbeitet  worden),  aber  sie 
sind  zweifelsohne  Zeugnisse  eines  humanistischen  Anfangers.  Ich  mochte  dies 
kurz  anhand  des  Christi  lesu  triumphus  darlegen. 

Es  handelt  sich  hier  um  ein  religioses  Thema  (die  triumphale  Auferstehung 
Christi).  Das  Thema  ist  aber  in  einem  antiken  Gewand  dargestellt.  Die  Os- 
mose der  Antike  mit  dem  Christentum  ist  ihm  hier  aber  gar  nicht  gelungen. 
Nicht  nur  erweist  sich,  daft  Vives  damals  nur  mit  wenigen  klassischen  Auto- 
ren  bekannt  war  (und  1514  mit  fast  keinen  griechischen  Autoren),  sondern 
vor  allem  unterbleibt  eine  harmonische  kunstlerische  Leistung.  Die  Rede  des 
Joannes  Fortis,  die  den  Schluftteil  des  Triumphus  bildet,  belegt  dies  sehr  gut. 
Vives  kannte  die  Stelle  aus  Gellius  (5,6)  iiber  die  verschiedenen  militarischen 
Kranze.  Die  Rede  des  Fortis  ist  so  aufgebaut,  daft  jeweils  ein  Zitat  aus  Gel- 
hus  iiber  einen  antiken  Kranz  gegeben  wird,  und  daft  anschlieftend  dargelegt 
wird,  Christus  habe  diese  Kranze  verdient.  Die  klassische  Kenntnis  ist  mit 
der  religiosen  Darlegung  aber  kaum  verbunden.  Im  Jahre  1514  war  Vives  deut- 
hch  noch  weit  von  seinem  literarischen  Konnen,  wie  dieses  uns  in  den  Jahren 
1518-1519  begegnet,  entfernt.  Ich  mochte  damit  sagen,  dafier  1517  noch  nicht 
zu  dieser  humanistischen  Meisterschaft  aufgestiegen  war.  Das  kann  man,  m.E., 
aus  der  Veritas  fucata  ableiten.  Diese  Veritas  fucata  ist  in  den  Opuscula  varia  mit 
der  Anima  senis  verbunden.  Dem  Widmungsbrief  gemafi,  ist  diese  Veritas  als 
praefatio  zum  Christi  Triumphus  gemeint.  Die  Veritas  ist  aber  nicht  in  den  Pari- 
ser  Druck  aus  dem  Jahre  1514  aufgenommen.  Da  aber  diese  Veritas  mit  Paris 
verbunden  ist  ("eam  ego  Parisiis  feci"),  so  ist  sie,  m.E.,  nicht  schon  1514  ge- 
schrieben  worden  (sonst  hatte  man  sie  auch  wohl  1514  gedruckt),  sondern  sie 
ist  mit  dem  Pariser  Besuch  im  Jahre  1517  in  Verbindung  zu  bringen. 

Weil  nun  Vives'  erste  langere  Begegnung  mit  Lowen  im  akademischen  Jahr 


658  DAS  RINGEN  DES  J.    L.    VIVES 

1516/1517  stattfand,^  kann  man,  meiner  Meinung  nach,  mit  geniigender 
Wahrscheinlichkeit  daraus  schliefien,  dafi  Vives  eher  in  Lowen  als  in  Brugge 
eine  recht  breite  humanistische  Bildung  erworben  hat.  Erstens  kann  in  diesem 
Zusammenhang  darauf  hingewiesen  werden,  dafi  nur  wenige  Kontakte  mit  hu- 
manistisch  Interessierten  in  Brugge  vor  1516/1517  moglich  sind^°  (die  mei- 
sten  Kontakte  sind  spater  zu  datieren),  und  zweitens  mochte  ich  auf  folgenden 
Satz  aus  der  Praefatio  in  Leges  Ciceronis  hinweisen:^^  "Qui  enim  Parisiis  Lova- 
nium  eunti  certam  et  expeditissimam  indicat  viam,  nonne  is  in  viatorem  max- 
imum beneficium  confert?"  Gestattet  uns  dieses  Bild  nicht,  anzunehmen,  Vives 
habe  hier  auch  sagen  wollen,  dafi  ihm  der  Weg  von  Paris  nach  Lowen  ein 
maximum  beneficium  war,  d.h.  seine  wahrhafte  Bildung  als  humanistischer  Ge- 
lehrter  und  Kiinstler  darstellt? 

Schliefilich  mochte  ich  noch  eine  kleine  Hypothese  hinzufugen.  In  den  Op- 
uscula  varia  begegnen  wir  Vives  auch  als  humanistischem  literarischen  Kiinstler. 
Ich  habe  den  Eindruck,  dafi  Vives  nur  einige  Jahre  als  Uterarischer  Kiinstler 
tatig  gewesen  ist  {Somnium,  Declamationes  sullanae).  Es  folgt  dann  in  seinem  Leben 
eine  wichtige  Periode,  in  der  er  vielmehr  Theoretiker  und  Wissenschaftler  als 
Kiinstler  gewesen  ist.  In  De  subventione  pauperum  z.B.  (1526)  ist  die  Antike 
quellen-  und  auch  darstellungsmafiig  nur  marginal  anwesend:  Soweit  ich  es 
iiberblicken  kann,  bietet  eine  kritische  Edition  hier  nur  einen  beschrankten 
antiken  Quellenapparat.  Das  Gleiche  trifft  fiir  andere  seiner  politischen 
Schriften  aus  diesen  spaten  zwanziger  Jahren  zu.  Das  Bild  andert  sich  viel- 
leicht  noch  einmal  mit  den  Exercitationes  linguae  Latinae  (1538). 

Dies  alles  zu  iiberpriifen,  ware  sehr  interessant,  damit  wir  nuanciert  Be- 
griffe  wie  Humanismus  und  humanistische  Leistungen  auf  einen  erstrangigen 
Autor  wie  Vives  zmwenden  konnten.  Dies  alles  ist  aber  nur  moglich,  wenn 
uns  textkritische  Editionen  zur  Verfiigung  stehen. 


Anmerkungen 

1.  p.  O.  Kristeller,  "Thomas  Moms  als  Humanist,"  in:  P.  O.  Kristeller  und  H.  Maier, 
Thomas  Moms  als  Humanist,  Bamberg  1982,  12. 

2.  C.  G.  Norena,>fln  Luis  Vives,  The  Hague  1970,  149. 

3.  J.  L.  Vives,  Praefatio  in  Leges  Ciceronis;  Aedes  legum.  Ed.  C.  Matheeussen,  Leipzig 
1984;  die  Stelle  befmdet  sich  Praef  Leg  Cic.  §  24. 

4.  Vives,  Praef  Leg  Cic.  (ed.  cit.),  §  26. 

5.  Vives,  Praef  Leg  Cic.  (ed.  cit.),  §  27. 

6.  Vives,  Praef  Leg  Cic.  (ed.  cit.),  §  29. 

7.  Erasmus,  Opus  epistolarum.  Ed.  Allen,  IV,  Oxford  1922,  Nr.  1106,  Z.  104. 

8.  J.  IJsewijn,  "J.  L.  Vives  in  1512-1517.  A  Reconsideration  of  Evidence,"  in:  Hu- 
manistica  Lovaniensia  26,  1977,  92. 

9.  J.  IJsewijn,  art.  cit.,  90. 

10.  J.  IJsewijn,  art.  cit.,  83. 

11.  Vives,  Praef  Leg  Cic.  (ed.  cit.),  §  21. 


Margaret  More  Roper's  Translation  of 
Erasmus'  Precatio  Dominica 

Elizabeth  McCutcheon 

In  1524,  Margaret  More  Roper's  translation  of  Erasmus'  Precatio  Dominica 
(1523)  was  published,  quasi-anonymously,  with  a  seminal  introduction 
by  Richard  Hyrde  on  the  importance  of  the  new  learning  for  women. 
For  anything  comparable  we  need  to  look  ahead  to  the  1540's,  when  the  noble 
women  and  gentlewomen  of  England  were: 

Not  onely  geuen  to  the  studie  of  humain  sciences  and  of  straunge  toun- 
gues,  but  also  so  throughly  experte  in  holy  scriptures,  that  they  are  hable 
to  compare  with  the  best  wryters  ...  in  translatyng  good  bookes  out  of 
Latine  or  Greke  into  Englishe  for  the  vse  and  commoditee  of  suche  as 
are  rude  and  ignoraunt  of  the  sayd  toungues.^ 

Nicholas  Udall  addressed  this  encomium  to  Catherine  Parr.  By  contrast, 
Margaret  Roper  (1505-1544)  was  still  very  young;^  she  was  scarcely  a  public 
figure,  and  her  connections,  while  crucial,  were  not  with  royailty  or  the  Court 
but  with  the  humanistic  movement,  through  her  father,  Erasmus,  and  oth- 
ers.^ Vives  praised  Margaret  and  her  sisters  in  his  Instruction  of  a  Christian 
Woman  (1523).'*  And  two  years  earlier,  Erasmus  told  Bude  that  their  educa- 
tion had  convinced  him  of  the  value  of  education  for  women. ^  Still  livelier  ev- 
idence comes  from  Erasmus'  colloquy  between  the  abbot  and  the  learned 
woman,  probably  based  upon  Margaret  Roper. ^  The  young  Magdalia  easily 
refutes  the  abbot's  notion  that  "learning  doesn't  fit  a  woman,"  arguing  that  true 
pleasures  are  those  of  the  mind  and  that  the  good  wife  needs  wisdom.  She  also 
points  to  several  exemplars:  the  "More  girls"  in  Englaind,  the  Pirckheimers  and 
Blauers  in  Germany.^ 

In  fact  Margaret  More  Roper  was  the  stellar  student  in  what  is  often  called 
the  "school  of  More."  There  were  several  tutors,  but  Thomas  More  himself 
oversaw  the  children's  education,  and  the  letter  that  he  sent  to  Margaret's  tutor, 
Gonell,  in  1518,  is  a  major  statement  about  education  for  women  in  Renais- 
sance Englcind.  More  characteristically  links  "moral  probity"  with  learning, 


66o  MARGARET   MORE  ROPEr's  TRANSLATION  OF   ERASMUS 

singling  out  "piety  towards  God,  charity  to  all,  and  modesty  and  Christian  hu- 
mility in  themselves.'*  He  insists  that  even  moderate  skill  in  learning  will  be 
invaluable,  "because  the  reward  of  wisdom  is  too  solid  to  be  lost  with  riches 
or  to  perish  with  beauty,  since  it  depends  on  the  inner  knowledge  of  what  is 
right. "^  He  also  addresses  the  question  of  woman's  capacity  to  learn: 

Nor  do  I  think  that  the  harvest  is  much  affected  whether  it  is  a  man  or 
a  woman  who  does  the  sowing.  They  both  have  the  name  of  human  being 
whose  nature  reason  differentiates  from  that  of  beast;  both,  I  say,  are  equally 
suited  for  the  knowledge  of  learning  by  which  reason  is  cultivated,  and, 
like  plowed  land,  germinates  a  crop  when  the  seeds  of  good  precepts  have 
been  sown.  But  if  the  soil  of  a  woman  be  naturally  bad,  and  apter  to 
bear  fern  than  gr2iin,  by  which  saying  many  keep  women  from  study, 
I  think,  on  the  contrary,  that  a  woman's  wit  is  the  more  diligently  to  be 
cultivated,  so  that  nature's  defect  may  be  redressed  by  industry. ^^ 

More  answers  misogynist  objections  by  emphasizing  the  importance  of  nur- 
ture. But  he  himself  here  seems  to  view  the  two  sexes  as  equal  in  native  ra- 
tional capacity  and  in  their  ability  to  learn  and  to  exercise  right  reason. ^^ 

The  actual  curriculum  that  explains  some  part  of  Margaret's  credentials  as 
translator  was  a  rigorous  one.  It  was  grounded  in  a  mastery  of  Latin  and  Greek, 
included  training  in  dialogues,  disputations,  and  declamations,  embraced  the 
liberal  and  humane  arts  together  with  theology  and  medicine,  and  was  pious 
as  well  as  learned.  Of  particular  interest  is  a  process  of  translation  (from  Latin 
to  English  and  English  to  Latin)  that  More  encouraged,  rather  as  Cheke  and 
Ascham  were  to  do  later.  He  put  this  to  particularly  apt,  if  ironic,  use  when 
one  of  his  daughters  translated  the  Latin  letter  he  had  written  to  Oxford  Uni- 
versity in  1518,  defending  Greek  and  liberal  learning,  more  generally,  from 
an  attack  by  a  barbarous  preacher,  and  another  daughter  wrote  a  second  Latin 
version.  ^^ 

Unfortunately,  out  of  all  that  Margaret  Roper  must  have  written,  only  her 
translation  of  Erasmus  and  a  few  letters  in  English  and  Latin  are  extant.  But 
Stapleton  mentions  a  number  of  other  works,  including  prose  and  verses  writ- 
ten in  Greek  and  Latin  and  several  speeches  written  in  Latin  and  English.  She 
acquired  a  small  but  secure  place  in  sixteenth-century  patristic  scholarship  by 
emending  a  corrupt  passage  in  St.  Cyprian.  And  in  1522  she  and  her  father 
wrote,  in  friendly  competition,  on  the  subject  of  the  last  four  things.  ^^ 

In  1521  More  wrote  to  Margaret,  urging  her  to  continue  to  find  time  for 
"humane  letters"  and  "liberal  studies."^*  But  in  1523  More  still  addressed  her 
as  one  who  expected  an  audience  of  two:  her  husband  and  her  father.  Writing 
just  before  her  first  child  was  born,  he  sees  her  as  more  than  an  apprentice, 
however.  He  comments  that  men  would  never  believe  "that  you  had  not  often 
availed  yourself  of  another's  help;  whereas  of  all  the  writers  you  least  deserved 
to  be  thus  suspected."  And  he  adds: 


ELIZABETH   MCCUTCHEON  66l 

Although  you  cannot  hope  for  an  adequate  reward  for  your  labor,  yet 
nevertheless  you  continue  to  unite  to  your  singular  love  of  virtue  the  pur- 
suit of  literature  and  art.  Content  with  the  profit  and  pleasure  of  your 
conscience,  in  your  modesty  you  do  not  seek  for  the  praise  of  the  public, 
nor  value  it  overmuch  even  if  you  receive  it,  but  because  of  the  great 
love  you  bear  us,  you  regard  us  — your  husband  and  myself— as  a  suf- 
ficiently large  circle  of  readers  for  all  that  you  write. ^^ 

The  publication  of  A  Deuout  Treatise  upon  the  Pater  Noster  sometime  after  Oc- 
tober 1,  1524,  when  Hyrde  completed  his  prefatory  letter,  marks  a  major,  in- 
deed unprecedented,  change  in  attitudes  then,  on  the  part  of  Margaret  Roper, 
Thomas  More,  and  the  More  circle.  Since  she  is  not  named  on  the  title  page, 
Margaret  Roper's  modesty  was  preserved.  Yet  a  small  circle  of  readers  would 
have  known  who  the  translator  was.  And  the  letter  dedicating  the  work  to  Fran- 
ces Staverton,  More's  niece  and  Margaret's  cousin,  gives  several  hints  about 
the  identity  of  the  "yong  vertuous  and  well  lerned  gentylwoman  of  .xix.  yere 
of  age"  described  on  the  title-page.  ^^ 

Behind  the  publication  of  this  little  book  in  black-letter  we  must  see  a  large 
claim  for  the  fruits  of  the  new  learning  for  women.  This  claim  is  visualized 
in  the  woodcut  from  the  first  extant  edition,  which  shows  a  young  woman  at 
a  desk  turning  the  pages  of  an  open  book  in  a  book-lined  room.  And  it  is  much 
reiterated  by  Richard  Hyrde  in  a  long  prefatory  letter  which  Foster  Watson 
has  called  "the  first  reasoned  claim  of  the  Renascence  period,  written  in  Eng- 
lish, for  the  higher  education  of  women. "^^  What  Hyrde  seems  to  be  doing, 
in  fact,  is  domesticating  More's  ideas  about  the  education  of  women  for  an 
English  reading  public.  From  one  point  of  view  he  simplifies  points  made  in 
the  letter  to  Gonell.  Where  More  is  concise  and  philosophical,  Hyrde  is  dif- 
fuse and  pragmatic.  His  sense  of  the  relations  between  learning  and  the  moral 
life  seems  less  profound  than  More's,  and  he  writes  more  defensively,  refuting 
charges  that  the  new  learning  would  corrupt  women.  But  in  his  vigorous  in- 
sistence upon  the  goodness  of  women,  the  value  of  Greek  and  Latin,  and  the 
connection  between  piety  and  learning,  Hyrde  articulates  ideas  embraced  in 
subsequent  generations.  Like  Margaret  Roper,  middle  and  late  sixteenth- 
century  Englishwomen  will  turn  to  the  translation  of  religious  and  spiritual 
works  written  in  Latin  in  exercising  their  virtue  and  learning.  Moreover,  Hyrde 
is  consciously  presenting  a  model.  He  explains  that  the  "vertuous  conuersa- 
cion/lyuyng/and  sadde  demeanoure"  of  the  translator  are  proof  enough  of  what 
good  learning  does.^^ 

Margaret  Roper's  translation,  then,  seems  to  have  been  published,  primar- 
ily, to  advance  the  cause  of  the  new  learning  for  women.  There  must  have 
been  other  reasons,  too,  although  we  cannot  document  the  circumstances  sur- 
rounding the  translation.  But  Erasmus  had  dedicated  his  commentary  on  Pru- 
dentius'  Christmas  and  Epiphany  hymns  to  Margsiret  Roper  the  year  before, 


662  MARGARET  MORE  ROPER's  TRANSLATION  OF  ERASMUS 

commemorating  the  birth  of  her  first  child,  and  she  could  well  have  begun  her 
work  as  a  compliment  to  him.  She  would  have  been  interested  in  his  work  in 
any  case,  and  she  may  well  have  made  the  Precatio  Dominica  part  of  her  own 
devotional  life. 

From  a  broader  historical  perspective,  the  Deuout  Treatise  is  one  of  the  ear- 
liest examples  of  the  Englishing  of  Erasmian  piety,  "breaking  new  ground"  in 
a  "broader  campaign  directed  at  the  English-reading  public. "^^  Like  the  En- 
chiridion, Erasmus'  exposition  of  the  Lord's  Prayer  focuses  on  central  things, 
exhorting  the  inner  self  and  leading  the  soul  from  self-centeredness  and  world- 
liness  to  an  urgent,  vital  sense  of  its  dependence  upon  the  divine  and  of  God's 
presence  in  the  world.  For  Erasmus,  moreover,  the  Lord's  Prayer  was  a  model 
of  all  prayer,  petition  being  its  fundamental  form.^^  Thus  the  publication  of 
the  Deuout  Treatise  foreshadows  much  of  the  work  later  undertaken  by  women 
identified  with  the  new  learning— work  intended  "for  the  publique  instruccion 
&  edifiyng  of  the  vnlerned  multitude. "^^  Margaret  Roper's  translation  proved 
particularly  popular,  as  well:  by  the  early  1530's  there  were  three  editions,  of 
which  only  three  copies  have  survived. ^^ 

In  his  preface  Richard  Hyrde  nowhere  addresses  this  larger  question  of  the 
dissemination  of  Erasmian  piety.  For  that  we  need  to  look  at  the  preface  to 
a  slightly  later  work,  Gentien  Hervet's  translation  of  a  sermon  by  Erasmus. ^^ 
But  Hyrde  does  invite  us  to  "conferre  and  examyne  the  translaycon  with  the 
originall,"  remarking  on  Margaret  Roper's  elegance  and  erudition  in  both  Latin 
and  English  and  on  her  wisdom  and  "dyscrete  and  substancyall  iudgement  in 
expressynge  lyuely  the  latyn"  (103).  Hyrde's  invitation  points  to  yet  another 
major  reason  behind  the  decision  to  publish:  the  intrinsic  excellence  of  the  Deu- 
out Treatise. 

Nicholas  Udall  explains  the  hard  job  facing  any  would-be  translator  of  Er- 
asmus: 

As  for  the  grace  of  the  Latin  toungue  I  thinke  vnpossible  to  bee  liuely 
expressed,  as  this  autour  doeth  it  in  the  Latin  by  reason  of  soondrie  al- 
lusions, diuerse  prouerbes,  many  figures,  &  exornacions  rhetoricall,  with 
metaphores  innumerable  .  .  .  besides  that  an  infinite  sorte  of  woordes  there 
be,  whose  full  importing  can  not  with  one  mere  Englishe  worde  equi- 
ualently  bee  enterpreted.^* 

He  touches  the  vexing  problem  of  concision,  too,  pointing  out  that  "if  any  inter- 
pretour  should  in  some  places  bee  as  brief  in  the  Englishe  translacion  as  the 
autour  is  in  the  Latin:  he  should  make  thereof  but  a  derke  piece  of  weorke." 
He  identifies  yet  a  third  problem,  this  one  syntactical:  "By  reason  of  so  many 
membres,  or  parentheses,  or  digressions  .  .  .  [many  sentences]  are  so  long,  that 
onlesse  they  had  been  some  what  diuided,  they  would  haue  been  to  hard  for 
an  vnlearned  braine  to  conceiue,  muche  more  hard  to  conteine  and  kepe  it 
still."26 


ELIZABETH   MCCUTCHEON  663 

Ud2ill  is  writing  about  Erasmus'  Paraphrases,  admittedly,  and  not  the  Precatio 
Dominica.  But  this  too  is  adways  full  ofenergeia,  often  metaphoric,  and  extremely 
concise  and  elegant.  Its  handsome  parallelisms,  magnified  by  the  melody  of 
the  inflected  endings,  generate  a  great  deal  of  power.  It  is  hard  to  approximate 
the  same  effects  in  English,  which  depends  upon  segmentation  and  word  order. 
And  it  was  particularly  hard  to  do  so  in  the  first  part  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
when  English  was  in  such  a  transitional  state.  Yet  Thomas  More,  himself  a 
translator,  will  insist  — in  1528  — that  English  "is  plentuouse  ynoughe  to  ex- 
presse  oure  myndys  in  any  thynge  whereof  one  man  hathe  used  to  speke  with 
another. "^'^  And  Margaret  Roper  successfully  turned  Erasmus'  elegant  Latin 
into  a  sometimes  less  elegant  but  always  vital  and  "lively"  English,  to  borrow 
the  sixteenth-century  accolade  for  the  good  translation.^^ 

As  a  whole,  Margaret  Roper's  translation  is  close  and  careful  and  shows  a 
sensitive  rethinking  of  the  Latin  in  the  light  of  her  native  English. ^^  Her  clau- 
ses usually  move  clearly  and  naturally,  logical  relationships  are  fully  articu- 
lated, and  there  is  no  sense  of  strain  in  the  handling  of  participiEil  constructions. 
Her  vocabulary  is  well  bred,  but  colloquial,  idiomatic,  and  obviously  chosen 
with  an  eye  to  context.  She  does  not,  then,  rigidly  translate  the  same  word 
the  same  way:  "uota"  is  "petycions"  at  one  place  (11),  "desyres"  at  another  (15). 
She  is  never  overly  literal  or  fussily  pedantic  and  on  occasion  rather  casually 
turns  a  plural  to  a  singular  noun  or  changes  the  tense  of  a  verb.  On  the  other 
hand,  she  omits  almost  nothing  and  she  adds  very  little  altogether  new  ma- 
terial, although  there  is  a  significant  process  of  dilation. 

In  making  her  translation  she  seems  to  have  worked  by  phrase  and  clause, 
rather  than  word  by  word.  Like  most  sixteenth-century  English  translators, 
her  first  concern  seems  to  have  been  for  what  her  father  later  termed  the  sen- 
tence of  the  author,  Udall  the  sense  of  the  book.  But  she  was  aware  of  what 
was  sometimes  called  grace,  sometimes  style,  she  had  a  good  ear  for  Latin  and 
English  rhythms,  and  she  is  particularly  effective  in  rendering  the  hortatory. 
Here  is  Erasmus,  for  exaimple:  "Quis  enim  ferat  esse  mundi  ludibrium,  rele- 
gari,  protrudi  in  carcerem,  uinciri,  damnari,  torqueri,  exui  facultatibus,  spol- 
iari  uxore  charissima  ac  dulcissimis  liberis:  denique  crudeli  morte  perimi,  nisi 
fuerit  tuo  coelesti  pane  subinde  confirmatus"  (48).  And  here  is  Margaret  Roper: 

For  who  father  might  abyde  to  be  had  in  derision  of  the  worlde  /  to  be 
outlawed  and  banisshed  /  to  be  putte  in  prison:  to  be  fettred  and  man- 
acled: to  be  spoyled  of  all  his  goodes  /  and  by  stronge  hande  /  be  de- 
priued  of  the  company  of  his  moost  dere  wyfe  and  wel-beloued  children 
/  but  if  nowe  and  than  /  he  were  hertened  with  thy  heuenly  and  gostly 
breed  (49). 

Suppressing  the  reference  to  death  (whether  consciously  or  not),  she  has  oth- 
erwise developed  the  passage  to  stress  familial  relationships,  and  she  has 
achieved  a  more  empathic  and  expansive  English  rhythm.  So  there  are  dis- 


664  MARGARET   MORE  ROPER's  TRANSLATION  OF   ERASMUS 

tinct  differences  between  Erasmus'  text  and  hers,  despite  her  tendency  to  ef- 
face herself.  And  these  differences  are  the  more  interesting  (and  revelatory  of 
her  own  style  and  character)  because  they  are  often  the  result  of  microscopic 
changes  that  Margaret  Roper  herself  may  not  even  have  been  conscious  of  mak- 
ing. 

One  major  difference  is  syntactical.  Her  sentences  are  often  longer  than  Er- 
asmus', since  she  has  a  tendency  to  look  ahead  and  attach  the  next  period  or 
periods  to  the  one  she  is  translating  if  she  senses  a  close  relation  between  them. 
Thus  Erasmus'  periods  become  longer- breathed,  softer,  and  looser,  even  when 
the  individual  clauses  are  almost  identical.  Sometimes  her  sentences,  though 
well  constructed,  are  too  long.  Yet  this  tells  us  something  about  Margaret's 
innate  intellectual  ability.  She  can  hold  a  great  deal  of  material  in  her  head 
at  one  time  and  is  aware  of  the  movement  of  ideas  and  the  logic  of  Erasmus' 
prose.  A  heightened  oral  sensitivity  almost  surely  is  a  second  factor. 

Her  text  as  a  whole  is  also  significantly  longer.  In  and  of  itself  this  says  rather 
little  about  Margaret  Roper.  Later  in  the  century,  translators  attempted  to 
replicate  Latin  concision.  However,  English  is  not  an  inflected  language  and 
it  achieves  weight  and  emphasis  differently,  so  that  even  the  most  literal  trans- 
lation tends  to  be  longer  than  its  Latin  original.  But  Margaret's  is  longer  still. 
As  was  the  custom  in  Renaissance  England,  she  frequently  doubles  nouns  and 
verbs,  giving  two  near  synonyms  where  Erasmus  has  just  one  word.  At  times 
this  verges  on  the  formulaic:  "aknowledge  &  confesse"  (11),  "wyckednesse  and 
synne"  (11),  "seruauntes  and  bondemen"  (15),  "veryte  and  trouthe"(15,  47), 
or  "vnyte  and  concorde"  (15,  39).  But  a  closer  look  at  her  doublets  suggests 
that  often  she  is  responding  to  the  nuances  of  the  Latin  word,  as  when  "sit- 
imus"  becomes  "thurst  and  desyre"  (16,  17),  or  "illustrabitur"  becomes  "may 
shine  and  be  noble"  (30,  31).  And  she  frequently  employs  doublets  for  em- 
phasis, intensification  of  idea  and  feeling,  and  rhythm.  Here  is  her  version  of 
our  relation  to  the  devil,  with  its  four  sets  of  doublets:  "The  tyme  was  /  whan 
we  were  seruauntes  to  wyckednesse  and  synne  I  by  the  miserable  generacion  of 
Adam:  we  were  also  children  of  the  fende  /  by  whose  instinction  and  spyrite  we 
were  driuen  and  compelled  to  euery  kynde  of  myschefe  and  offenci"  (11,  my  italics). 

Other  changes  bring  us  even  closer  to  Margaret  Roper.  She  frequently  adds 
adjectives  and  adverbs,  intensifying  the  feeling;  she  personalizes  nouns  through 
possessives,  in  this  and  other  ways  making  abstract  relationships  more  spe- 
cific; she  multiplies  vocatives.  We  find  "marueylous  power"  (13),  "great  gen- 
tylnesse"  (13),  "proude  philosophers"  (47),  "moost  holy  body"  (13),  "vnrewly 
seruauntes"  (23),  "blessed  body"  (47),  "moost  dere"  (39).  Similarly,  "a  patre 
diabolo"  becomes  "from  the  deuyll  our  father"  (10,  11),  and  "patrem  coelestem," 
"oure  father  celestyall"  (12,  13).  And  where  Erasmus  speaks  of  the  process  of 
redemption  as  "denique  &  uitam  conferet  aeternam,"  Margaret  writes  "finally 
brynge  vs  to  euerlasting  lyfe"  (46,  47).  She  also  renders  the  relation  between 
God  the  Father  and  the  Son  more  intimate,  as  when  she  turns  "unigeniti  tui" 
to  "of  thy  dere  sonne"  (46,  47).  Her  most  striking  additions,  perhaps,  aside 


ELIZABETH   MCCUTCHEON  665 

from  her  many  doublets  and  adjectives,  are  her  vocatives.  Where  Erasmus  has 
no  vocative  at  all,  Margaret  will  often  add  "father"  or  "good  father."  And  where 
Erasmus  addresses  the  "father,"  Margaret  addresses  "good  father,"  as  if  writ- 
ing to  or  talking  with  her  own  father. 

These  are  simple  changes,  grammatically  speaking.  But  the  effect  is  more 
complicated  stylistically  and  psychologically.  Margaret  Roper's  version  is  more 
affective  and  magnifies  states  of  feeling  and  relationships,  heightening  them 
emotion2illy  and  making  them  more  overt  and  more  personal.  In  particular, 
the  parent-child  relationship  that  is  at  the  heart  of  the  Lord's  Prayer  is  am- 
plified and  becomes  more  intimate:  there  seems  to  be  less  distance  between 
God  and  the  speaker. 

Many  of  these  changes  are  foreshadowed  by  the  change  in  the  title.  Eras- 
mus', Precatio  Dominica  in  Septem  Portiones  Distributa,  formally  names  the  prayer 
and  emphasizes  the  formal  organization  of  the  work,  divided  into  seven  parts 
by  way  of  the  days  of  the  week.  By  contrast,  A  Deuout  Treatise  upon  the  Pater 
Noster  includes  the  first  words  of  the  prayer  as  it  was  recited  by  Christendom 
and  is  already  less  formal  and  more  intimate.  Strongest  in  those  "expressions 
of  tender  affection,"  which  the  Bishop  of  Exeter  admired  in  one  of  Margaret's 
Latin  letters,  Margaret  Roper's  Deuout  Treatise  witnesses  to  the  erudition,  piety, 
and  literary  sensitivity  of  its  translator. ^^  It  must  also  be  seen  as  a  prototype 
of  the  fruits  of  the  new  learning  for  women  in  sixteenth-century  England. 

University  of  Hawaii 


Notes 


1.  Preface  to  paraphrase  on  John  in  The  First  Tome  or  Volume  of  the  Paraphrase  of  Er- 
asmus upon  the  Newe  Testamente  (London,  1548),  sig.  C|  i. 

2.  The  standard  life  is  E.  E.  Reynolds,  Margaret  Roper:  Eldest  Daughter  of  St.  Thomas 
More  (New  York:  P.  J.  Kenedy,  1960).  A  substantial  bibliography  is  part  of  my  essay, 
"Margaret  More  Roper,"  forthcoming  in  Women  Writers  of  the  Renaissance  and  Reforma- 
tion, edited  by  Katharina  M.  Wilson. 

3.  See  John  Archer  Gee,  "Margaret  Roper's  English  Version  of  Erasmus'  Precatio  Do- 
minica and  the  Apprenticeship  Behind  Early  Tudor  Translation,"  The  Review  of  English 
Studies,  13  (1937):259-61. 

4.  In  Foster  Watson,  Vives  and  the  Renascence  Education  of  Women  (London:  Edwin  Ar- 
nold, 1912),  p.  53. 

5.  Opvs  Epistolarvm  Des.  Erasmi  Roterodami,  ed.  P.  S.  Allen  and  H.  M.  Allen  (Oxford: 
Clarendon  Press,  1906-1958),  4:578-79. 

6.  The  Colloquies  of  Erasmus,  trans.  Craig  R.  Thompson  (Chicago:  University  of  Chi- 
cago Press,  1965),  p.  218. 

7.  Ibid.,  pp.  222-23. 

8.  St.  Thomas  More,  Selected  Letters,  ed.  Elizabeth  Frances  Rogers  (New  Haven:  Yale 
University  Press,  1961),  p.  105. 


666  MARGARET   MORE   ROPER's  TRANSLATION  OF  ERASMUS 


9.  Ibid.,  p.  104. 

10.  Ibid.,  p.  105;  my  italics. 

1 1 .  For  a  provocative  discussion  of  More's  attitudes  towards  women  in  1516  and  later, 
see  Judith  P.  Jones  and  Sherianne  Sellers  Seibel,  "Thomas  More's  Feminism:  To  Re- 
form or  Re-Form,"  in  Quincentennial  Essays  on  St.  Thomas  More:  Selected  Papers  from  the  Tho- 
mas More  College  Conference,  ed.  Michael  J.  Moore  (Boone,  North  Carolina:  Albion,  1978), 
pp.  67-77. 

12.  Thomas  Stapleton,  The  Life  and  Illustrious  Martyrdom  of  Sir  Thomas  More,  trans. 
Philip  E.  Hallett,  ed.  E.  E.  Reynolds  (Sussex:  Burns  and  Gates,  1966),  p.  92.  Com- 
pare Gee,  "Margaret  Roper's  English  Version,"  pp.  265-71. 

13.  Stapleton,  The  Life  and  Illustrious  Martydom  of  Sir  Thomas  More,  pp.  103-9. 

14.  More,  Selected  Letters,  pp.  148-49. 

15.  Ibid.,  p.  155. 

16.  Cited  from  the  diplomatic  reprint  edited  by  Richard  L.  DeMolen  in  Erasmus  of 
Rotterdam:  A  Quincentennial  Symposium,  ed.  Richard  L.  DeMolen  (New  York:  Twayne 
Publishers,  1971),  p.  96.  I  also  consulted  the  Precatio  Dominica  (Basel,  1523)  and  an  un- 
dated early  edition  of  ^  Deuout  Treatise  upon  the  Pater  Noster,  both  at  the  British  Library. 

17.  Watson,  Vives,  p.  14.  See  also  Diane  Valeri  Bayne,  ''The  Instruction  of  a  Christian 
Woman:  Richard  Hyrde  and  the  Thomas  More  Circle,"  Moreana,  45  (1975):5-15. 

18.  This  citation  from  Hyrde's  preface  is  taken  from  DeMolen's  diplomatic  reprint, 
p.  101 .  Subsequent  citations  from  Hyrde  will  be  from  this  reprint  and  included  in  my  text. 

19.  James  Kelsey  McConica,  English  Humanists  and  Reformation  Politics  (Gxford:  Cla- 
rendon Press,  1965),  p.  67. 

20.  See  Lee  Daniel  Snyder,  "Erasmus  on  Prayer:  A  Renaissance  Reinterp relation," 
Renaissance  and  Reformation,  12  (1976):21-27. 

21.  Udall,  Preface  to  paraphrase  on  John,  sig.  (p  i  verso. 

22.  See  E.  J.  Devereux,  Renaissance  English  Translations  of  Erasmus:  A  Bibliography  to 
1 700  (Toronto:  University  of  Toronto  Press,  1983),  pp.  176-78,  and  the  forthcoming 
edition  of  Volume  I  of  the  Short-Title  Catalogue:  I  consulted  a  working  copy  at  the  Hun- 
tington Library. 

23.  Discussed  in  John  A.  Gee,  "Hervet's  English  Translation,  with  its  Appended  Glos- 
sary, of  Erasmus'  De  Immensa  Dei  Misericordia,"  Philological  Quarterly  15  (1936):  148-52. 

24.  Udall,  Preface  to  paraphrase  on  Luke  in  The  First  Tome  of  the  Paraphrase  of  Er- 
asmus, sig.  (p  V  verso. 

25.  Ibid.,  sig.  (p  v  verso. 

26.  Ibid.,  sig.  (p  vi. 

27.  St.  Thomas  More,  A  Dialogue  Concerning  Heresies ,  ed.  Thomas  M.  C.  Lawler,  Ger- 
main Marc'hadour,  and  Richard  C.  Marius,  The  Complete  Works  of  Thomas  More  (New 
Haven:  Yale  University  Press,  1981),  6,  Part  1:337. 

28.  Background  studies  consulted  include:  Flora  Ross  Amos,  Early  Theories  of  Trans- 
lation (New  York:  Columbia  University  Press,  1920);  Harry  Burrowes  Lathrop,  Trans- 
lations from  the  Classics  into  English:  From  Caxton  to  Chapman,  1477-1620  (Madison: 
University  of  Wisconsin  Press,  1933);  F.  O.  Matthiessen,  Translation:  An  Elizabethan 
Art  (Cambridge,  Mass.:  Harvard  University  Press,  1931);  and  Samuel  K.  Workman, 
Fifteenth  Century  Translation  as  an  Influence  on  English  Prose  (Princeton:  Princeton  Univer- 
sity Press,  1940). 

29.  The  analysis  that  follows  was  facilitated  by  the  double  edition  by  Germain  Marc'- 
hadour: see  "Erasmus'  Paraphrase  of  the  Pater  Noster  (1523)  with  its  English  Translation 
by  Margaret  Roper  (1524),"  ed.  Germain  Marc'hadour,  Moreana,  7  (1965):9-64.  Sub- 
sequent citations  from  this  double  edition  will  be  included  in  my  text. 

30.  More,  Selected  Letters,  p.  152. 


I 


Mazzoni  and  Bacon: 
The  Mind  and  Natural  Philosophy 

Phillips  Salman 


n  the  Advancement  of  Learning  of  1605,  Francis  Bacon,  writing  in  English, 
characterized  the  mind  in  terms  of  its  origin,  structure,  and  function: 


God  hath  framed  the  mind  of  man  as  a  mirror  or  glass  capable  of  the 
image  of  the  universal  world,  and  joyful  to  receive  light  and  not  only 
delighted  in  beholding  the  variety  of  things  and  vicissitudes  of  times,  but 
raised  also  to  fmd  out  and  discern  the  ordinances  and  decrees  which 
throughout  all  those  changes  are  infallibly  observed.^ 

Bacon  locates  the  mind  in  a  subordinate  but  aspiring  position  in  relation  to 
God  and,  as  a  delighted  observer  and  fmder  out  of  laws,  in  relation  to  nature. 
He  also  implies  something  of  his  theory  of  experimental  method  in  his  men- 
tion of  observation  of  and  inference  from  "ordinance  and  decrees."  In  two  other 
uses  of  the  mirror  image  he  gives  us  a  more  particular  notion  of  the  way  the 
mind  works  when  it  perceives.  The  mind  may  be  "a  clear  and  equal  glass, 
wherein  the  beams  of  things  should  reflect  according  to  their  true  incidence" 
or  "rather  like  an  enchanted  glass,  full  of  superstition  and  imposture  if  it  be 
not  delivered  and  reduced."  (3:394-95)  The  former  is  the  ideal  for  science  be- 
cause it  gives  a  direct  account  of  reality;  the  latter,  while  it  may  do  for  poetry, 
in  scientific  efforts  can  produce  only  distorted  images  of  reality,  and  Bacon 
uses  it  forcefully  to  promulgate  the  effectiveness  of  his  new  proposals  for  doing 
natural  philosophy.  "Certainly  they  are  quite  new,"  he  tells  James  I  in  the  Ep- 
istle Dedicatory  to  the  Novum  Organum,  "totally  new  in  their  very  kind:  and 
yet  they  are  copied  from  a  very  ancient  model,  even  the  world  itself  and  the 
nature  of  things  and  of  the  mind,"  Works  1:123  and  4:11.  I  quote  from  the 
nineteenth-century  translation,  which  is  misleading  yet  somehow  just.  Its  word 
"copy"  literally  renders  Bacon's  descripta,  a  word  for  which  "copy"  refers  to  trans- 
cribing anything  from  an  original  as  well  as  to  describing  in  one  of  the  fme 
arts,  to  representing  and  defming.  Bacon  is  thinking  of  the  mind  as  essentially 


668  MAZZONI  AND  BACON 

some  kind  of  writer,  whose  mind  is  in  accurate  commerce  with  the  frame  of 
the  externsil  world.  It  is  ironically  appropriate  that  the  word  "copy"  became 
a  term  for  imitation  in  eighteenth-century  critics. 

Since  the  mirror  in  the  Renaissance  had  typically  referred  to  the  mind's  mime- 
sis of  reality,  it  naturally  makes  us  ask  what  Bacon  thinks  mimesis  is  and  where 
Bacon  got  his  notion  of  it.  We  are  further  impelled  to  ask  by  the  fact  that  Bacon, 
in  an  endeavor  to  make  them  do  scientifically  accurate  work,  analyzes  the  mis- 
use of  the  very  means  of  mimesis  — words. 

The  mirror  had  been  a  commonplace  figure  in  Renaissance  criticism  for  the 
purpose  of  literature,  as  we  don't  need  Hamlet's  speech  on  holding  a  mirror 
up  to  nature  to  remind  us.  If  we  bring  Renaissance  critical  theory  to  bear  on 
Bacon's  reference  to  the  mirror,  we  get  some  useful  results.  Renaissance  crit- 
ical theorists,  for  one  thing,  were  directly  concerned  with  the  way  the  mind 
functioned  to  produce  poems.  Poems  for  them  were  one  form  of  imitation  pro- 
duced by  the  mind;  philosophy  and  history  were  the  two  other  forms.  Espe- 
cially toward  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century,  the  forms  of  imitation  were 
characterized  by  Plato's  distinction  in  Sophist,  235-36,  between  the  eikastic  and 
phantastic,  between  imitations  that  resemble  an  original  and  imitations  that 
depart  from  it.^  Philosophy  or  history  would  be  eikastic  because  they  repre- 
sented reality  in  its  "true  incidence."  Poetry  would  be  phantastic  because  the 
mind  is  free  to  rework  in  imagination  the  facts  of  reality  to  produce  what  it 
will.  Rather  than  preferring  one  form  of  imitation  to  another.  Bacon  follows 
his  critical  predecessors  in  making  the  use  of  a  form  dependent  on  its  purpose 
and  in  attempting  to  purify  the  forms  so  that,  adulterate,  they  will  not  lead 
to  misconceptions.  It  is  curious  that  no  contemporary  scholar  I  have  found 
has  commented  on  this  distinction  in  Bacon's  critical  utterances.  Only  Kuno 
Fischer  in  1904  approached  it  with  his  terms  abbilden,  nachbilden,  and  Trugbil- 
dung.^  As  we  shall  see,  the  distinction  is  plain  enough  in  Bacon's  discussion 
of  words.  In  this  communication  I  will  consider  the  notions  of  imitation  im- 
plied in  Bacon's  cognitive  theory  by  (1)  rehearsing  the  theory  and  its  state- 
ments on  imitation  and  (2)  showing  how  it  was  handled  by  a  representative 
and  provocative  precedent  critic,  Jacopo  Mazzoni,  who  treats  imitation  in  terms 
of  his  encounter  with  Dante  and  who  gives  a  criticail  context  to  Bacon's  po- 
sitions. By  means  of  these  considerations  we  will  be  able  to  indicate  the  debt 
of  Bacon's  science  to  earlier  critical  thought. 

The  starting  point  for  Bacon's  congnitive  theory  has  to  be  his  famous  di- 
vision of  the  mind  into  three  faculties  — imagination,  reason,  and  memory  — 
and  his  assignment  of  fields  of  knowledge  to  them  — poetry  to  the  imagination, 
philosophy  to  the  reason,  and  history  to  the  memory.  In  the  De  augmentis  sci- 
entiarum  of  1623,  Bacon  gives  the  process  from  its  origins  in  sense  impressions. 
That  the  sciences  relate  to  the  operations  of  the  faculties  (I  quote  from  the 
nineteenth-century  translation) 


PHILLIPS   SALMAN  669 

may  be  easily  seen  by  observing  the  commencements  of  the  intellectual 
process.  The  sense,  which  is  the  door  of  the  intellect,  is  affected  by  in- 
dividuals only.  The  images  of  those  individuals  —  that  is,  the  impressions 
which  they  make  on  the  sense  — fix  themselves  in  the  memory,  and  pass 
into  it  in  the  first  instance  entire  as  it  were,  just  as  they  come.  These 
the  human  mind  proceeds  to  review  and  ruminate;  and  thereupon  either 
simply  rehearses  them,  or  makes  fanciful  imitations  of  them,  or  analyzes 
and  classifies  them.  Wherefore  from  these  three  fountains.  Memory, 
Imagination,  and  Reason,  flow  these  three  emanations.  History,  Poesy, 
and  Philosophy;  and  there  can  be  no  others.  For  I  consider  history  and 
experience  to  be  the  same  thing,  as  also  philosophy  and  the  sciences. 
(4:292-  93) 

This  passage  takes  us  to  the  question  of  eikastic  amd  phantastic  imitation  be- 
cause we  are  forced  by  Bacon's  argument  and  divisions  of  knowledge  to  define 
his  notion  of  the  form  in  which  the  fields  of  knowledge  are  realized,  namely, 
words.  Bacon  aids  us  by  defining  succinctly  the  nature  of  words  and  by  show- 
ing their  misuse  in  the  forming  of  his  famous  idols,  with  the  term  "idols"  cJso 
present  in  earlier  psychological  and  literary  theory.  In  1605  he  drew  on  Ar- 
istotle's De  interpretatione  by  defining  words  as  "the  tokens  and  signs  of  notions 
.  .  ."  and  "the  very  notions  of  the  mind  .  .  ."  as  "the  souls  of  words"  (4:24).  Ar- 
istotle had  characterized  words  as  expressions  of  notions  in  the  mind.  For  Bacon, 
similarly,  words  and  matter  are  functions  of  mental  workings.  In  the  S2ime  work, 
following  Christian  tradition  but  probably  more  specifically  Augustine's  De  tri- 
nitate,  Bacon  had  associated  words  with  the  Holy  Spirit  and  had  called  them 
vehicula  scientiae  and  in  that  context  had  shown  that  words  were  destroyed  by 
deceit  or  untruth  (3:29),  a  theme  he  pursues  in  the  essay  "Of  Truth." 

Bacon  pursues  a  variation  on  this  theme  of  untruth  in  his  account  of  the 
idols  as  they  appear  in  words.  In  this  variation,  phantastic  imitation  explicitly 
appears,  and  eikastic  imitation  appears  in  paraphrase.  Words  can  impose  idols 
of  two  kinds  on  the  understanding: 

They  are  either  names  (nomina)  of  things  which  do  not  exist  (for  as  there 
are  things  left  unnamed  through  lack  of  observation,  so  likewise  are  there 
names  which  result  from  fantastic  suppositions  per  suppositionem  phantas- 
ticam  and  to  which  nothing  in  reality  corresponds)  or  they  are  names  of 
things  which  exist,  but  yet  confused  and  ill  defined  and  hastily  and  ir- 
regularly derived  {abstracta)  from  realities.  (Novum  organum,  Axiom  60, 
Works  1:171;  4:61-62) 

It  is  plain  that  the  two  classes  of  erroneous  words  pertain  to  phantastic  im- 
itation. Words  naming  "things  which  do  not  exist"  spring  from  the  imagina- 
tion; confused  words  naming  things  which  do  exist  are  a  function  of  the  reason 


670  MAZZONI   AND   BACON 

acting  hastily.  Words  are  the  coin  of  Bacon's  "Idols  of  the  Marketplace"  and 
"Idols  of  the  Theatre,"  and  they  affect  the  understanding  when  they  are  un- 
verified by  the  reason.  In  doing  science  we  dismiss  the  former  and  define  and 
verify  the  latter.  Phantasy  is  excluded  from  the  inductions  of  science.'^ 

Bacon's  writings  on  the  mental  faculties  and  on  the  fields  of  knowledge  they 
produce  contain  the  points  of  indebtedness  to  earlier  critics  in  the  issue  of  im- 
itation. In  order  to  define  poetry  and  carry  out  practical  criticism  on  partic- 
ulcir  texts,  e2irlier  critics— not  all  of  them,  certainly,  or  consistently  —  considered 
the  parts  and  activity  of  the  mind,  the  forms  of  knowledge  it  produced,  and 
imitations  as  eikastic  and  phantastic.  Although  Murray  Wright  Bundy  in  1930 
took  it  2ilmost  as  a  given  that  Bacon  was  conversant  with  earlier  critics,  and 
Geoffrey  Shepherd  in  his  edition  of  Sidney's  Apology  and  Baxter  Hathaway  in 
Marvels  and  Commonplaces  have  laid  out  some  of  the  themes,  Bacon's  relation 
to  them  has  gone  virtually  undiscussed.^  Certain  problems  are  solved,  fur- 
thermore, if  Bacon's  debt  is  considered.  For  example,  when  Bacon  locates  poe- 
try in  relation  to  history  and  philosophy,  he  is  disclosing  a  "source"  in  literary 
criticism  in  that  prior  literary  critics,  more  than  the  philosophers  usually  ad- 
duced as  influences  on  Bacon,  commit  the  kind  of  division  Bacon  does.^  As 
Bernard  Weinberg  emphasized  in  his  chapter  "The  Classification  of  Poetics 
among  the  Sciences,"  to  do  criticism.  Renaissance  critics  were  at  pains  to  po- 
sition poetry,  as  Bacon  does,  in  relation  to  other  forms  of  knowledge.'^  Often 
the  effort,  again,  as  with  Bacon,  was  encyclopaedic.  Mazzoni  and  Patrizi,  for 
example,  wrote  both  philosophy  and  literary  criticism. 

Basically,  these  earlier  critics  also  regard  understEinding  the  structure  of  the 
mind  as  a  precondition  of  understanding  poetry  and  related  sciences.  Few  of 
the  philosophers  considered  as  sources  satisfy  this  encyclopaedic  effort  at  re- 
lating the  disciplines.  Neither  do  they  satisfy  the  fact  that  the  three  disciplines 
are  seen  in  relation  to  human  cognitive  processes;  yet  that  point  is  obligatory 
in  the  writing  of  the  critic  we  will  consider  to  establish  the  tradition  and  in 
the  writing  of  many  of  his  colleagues.  It  is  fascinating  to  see  Italian  critics  define 
a  sequence  and  division  of  sciences  similar  to  Bacon's  as  they  develop  their 
philosophies  or  poetics.  I  want  to  suggest  that  Bacon  derives  his  notion,  if  not 
his  full  treatment,  of  "idols"  partly  from  cinquecento  critics,  inasmuch  as  the 
term  is  an  earlier  term  of  art,  denoting  images  formed  in  the  imagination  and 
used  to  construct  philosophies,  histories,  and  poems. 

The  critic  chosen  to  illustrate  Bacon's  debt  is  representative  of  the  questions 
discussed,  and  he  was  reasonably  well  known  to  his  contemporaries.  Jacopo 
Mazzoni  da  Cesena  (1548-1598)  was  one  of  the  warriors  in  the  so-called  "Quar- 
rel over  Dante. "^  An  important  issue  in  that  quarrel  was  the  nature  of  Dante's 
form  of  imitation.  In  his  Delia  difesa  della  Commedia  di  Dante,  Mazzoni  takes  on 
that  issue  in  terms  of  the  Commedia  as  an  imitation  of  the  workings  of  the  imag- 
ination. He  does  so  in  the  context  of  all  the  faculties  as  they  are  treated  not 
only  in  the  Della  difesa,  but  also  in  his  philosophical  work  In  universam,  a  work 


PHILLIPS  SALMAN  67I 

frequently  concerned  with  cognitive  processes.  Mazzoni  disputed  with  Fran- 
cesco Patrizi  da  Cherso,  whom  Bacon  mentions  in  a  letter.  In  published  works, 
Patrizi  argued  with  Mazzoni  on  the  question  of  imitation  as  well  as  citing  him 
on  other  points.^  Patrizi's  published  accounts  of  Mazzoni  establish  the  pre- 
sumption that  Bacon  knew  of  Mazzoni,  since  he  knew  Patrizi.  I  will  be  work- 
ing both  with  Mazzoni's  Delia  difesa  della  Commedia  di  Dante,  which  was  completed 
in  about  1585  and  with  his  In  universam  Platonis,  et  Aristotelis  philosophiam  prae- 
ludia,  sive  de  comparatione  Platonis  et  Aristotelis,  published  in  Venice  in  1597.^^ 

The  place  to  start  with  Mazzoni  is  at  the  place  we  started  with  Bacon,  with 
his  account  of  the  mental  faculties  and  their  cognate  disciplines  and  with  the 
attendant  issue  of  the  classification  of  poetics  among  the  sciences.  The  first 
point  to  m2ike  is  really  an  important  reminder:  where  Bacon  defines  various 
sciences  so  as  to  study  natural  philosophy,  Mazzoni  defines  them  so  that  he 
can  study  poetry  and  poetics.  We  de2il  with  an  inverse  relationship  when  we 
place  Bacon's  thought  next  to  Mazzoni's. 

In  the  1597  printing  of  the  Della  difesa,  Mazzoni  gives  the  statement  about 
the  faculties  on  which  many  of  his  positions  rest.  Essenticdly  he  endorses  a  scho- 
lastic faculty— psychology.  It  comprises  senses,  imagination,  memory,  intel- 
lect, concupiscible  and  irascible  appetites,  and  will.  Each  of  the  faculties  has 
its  proper  object  (sects.  69-70  and  84;  pp.  141-47).  Both  intellect  and  will  are 
satisfied  only  by  God,  but  beneath  this  satisfaction  are  the  partial  ones  of  work- 
ing with  material  from  the  senses  (159).  That  work  produces  the  various  scien- 
ces, and  the  material  is  produced  in  much  the  same  way  that  Bacon  says  it 
is.  Sense  impressions  are  lodged  in  the  memory,  whose  only  function,  Maz- 
zoni emphasizes,  is  to  receive  those  images  and  store  them  (145). 

Like  Bacon,  Mazzoni  thinks  this  storehouse  of  imagery  is  drawn  on  by  the 
imagination  to  make  poetry  or  by  the  intellect  to  make  philosophy  or  history. 
These  fields  are  all  forms  of  imitation.  Committed  as  he  is  to  the  marvelous 
as  a  distinguishing  characteristic  of  poetry,  Mazzoni  judges  poetry  to  be  su- 
perior to  the  other  forms  of  imitation  because  it  is  fiction  and  not  intended 
to  ascertain  the  truth  of  something.  In  the  In  universam,  this  sequence  is  con- 
firmed. In  several  sections,  Mazzoni  relies  on  the  structure  just  described. 

With  these  statements  we  begin  to  approach  Mazzoni's  classification  because 
we  get  a  contrast  between  sciences.  As  Weinberg  showed,  Mazzoni  explicitly 
draws  on  Plato's  Republic  X,  where  objects  are  defined  as  "Ideas  (which  are 
contemplated),  Works  (which  are  made),  and  Images  (which  are  made  by  im- 
itation). Poetics  deals  with  the  last  of  these"  (sects  9-10,  p.  392).'*  Its  means 
are  words,  its  purpose  is  to  give  pleasure,  but  it  is  an  instrument  of  moral  phi- 
losophy (which  Mazzoni  calls  the  "civil  faculty")  and  which  deals  with  moral 
problems  in  the  state.  For  this  reason,  Mazzoni  thinks  the  Poetics  of  Aristotle 
is  the  ninth  book  of  the  Politics  (sect.  67,  p.  249). 

In  effect,  poetry  is  classified  as  part  of  moral  philosophy,  but  Mazzoni  does 
not  or  cannot  let  matters  rest  there,  and  he  makes  one  of  his  many  distinc- 


672  MAZZONI  AND   BACON 

tions.  Poetry  is  part  of  moral  philosophy,  but  Poetics  concerns  itself  with  ma- 
nipulating images  and  is  subject  to  the  intellect,  whose  product  in  this  context 
Mazzoni  calls  the  "rational  faculty"  (sect.  53,  pp.  400  ff.).  As  Mazzoni  pursues 
Poetry  and  its  purpose,  leaving  Poetics  aside  for  a  time,  he  distinguishes  be- 
tween kinds  of  images  that  create  credible  fictions  in  order  to  give  pleasure. 
The  distinction,  crucial  to  Mazzoni's  discussion,  is  drawn  from  the  Sophist  and 
is  between  eikastic  and  phantastic  imitation.  The  former  "represents  things 
which  are  really  found  or  at  least  have  been";  the  latter  are  "made  according 
to  the  caprice  of  the  artists"  (sect.  16).  Mazzoni  reinterprets  each  kind  of  image 
so  that  in  poetry  it  may  lose  Plato's  censure  and  be  a  fit  instrument  of  a  moral 
poet  (sects.  57-60).  Again  and  again  in  the  Delia  difesa,  Mazzoni  returns  to 
the  contrast  between  images  constructed  at  will  from  material  in  the  memory 
and  images  faithful  to  that  which  is  outside  of  the  mind.^^  Indeed,  Mazzoni 
entitles  one  chapter:  "Whether  Poetry  is  Capable  of  Eikastic  Imitation  is  Dis- 
puted; That  is.  Similitudes,  or  Whether  It  seeks  Only  Phantastic  Imitation" 
(3.  Cap.  2.  399  ff.).  The  test  case  for  him  is  poetry  derived  from  history. 

History  is  a  problem  because  it  corresponds  exactly  to  external  reality,  or 
ought  to,  yet  is  somehow  a  subject  for  poetry.  Mazzoni  conceives  of  this  prob- 
lem, as  he  does  the  universals  in  philosophy,  in  terms  of  eikastic  and  phan- 
tastic imitation,  together  with  a  rhetorical  sense  of  the  purpose  of  these  forms 
of  imitation  in  relation  to  an  audience.  He  says, 

the  speeches  of  history  and  those  of  the  sciences  and  of  the  arts  do  not 
contain  poetic  imitation,  named  by  us  above  Similitudinaria.  To  under- 
stand this  we  need  to  understand  that  .  .  .  this  sort  of  idol  has  per  se  no 
other  use  than  to  represent  in  order  to  teach  and  discover  the  truth  of 
things. 

The  idols  of  history  do  not  exploit  the  full  nature  of  idols,  Mazzoni  goes  on 
to  suggest,  as  do  those  of  poetry. 

We  C2in  say,  therefore,  that  the  historical  and  any  other  thing  that  is  taught 
within  nature  {vera),  although  by  means  of  its  conceits  and  from  words 
forms  idols,  does  not  at  all  events  form  them  qua  idol;  that  means  (as 
Plato  declared  in  the  Sophist)  the  idol  insofar  as  it  represents  and  resem- 
bles another  thing.  (397,  my  translation) 

Mazzoni  puts  a  good  face  on  Plato's  distinction  and  sees  in  the  poetic  idol  some- 
thing to  be  explored  for  itself.  Exploring  idols  in  the  context  of  poetry  would 
justify  them  for  Bacon;  exploration  would  be  a  play  and  expression  of  the  will 
that  Bacon  could  approve  of. 

Mazzoni,  however,  is  troubled  by  the  case  of  history  because  he  would  like 
it  to  be  a  fit  subject  for  poetry,  yet  if  one  plays  with  history,  one  falsifies  it 
and  no  longer  has  history.  Mazzoni  is  simply  unable  to  accept  Bacon's  sort 
of  statement  that  poetry  is  "feigned  history."  He  has  to  invent  a  form  whose 


PHILLIPS   SALMAN  673 

matter  is  accurate  in  the  way  history  is  accurate  but  that  is  rendered  in  a  way 
that  excites  wonder,  something  Bacon  could  not  do.  Mazzoni  concludes  that 
the  poet  can  accomplish  this  kind  of  history  with  an  eikastic  poetry  in  which 
the  poet 

with  greater  diligence  than  the  historian  ornaments  his  writing  with  many 
lights  and  many  poetic  colors  in  order  that  the  simulacrum  he  wants  to 
form  can  be  seen  better  and  understood  by  everyone  that  reads  his  poem. 
(p.397) 

Mazzoni  is  committed  a  priori  to  the  marvelous  and  to  wonder  as  the  central 
requisites  for  poetry,  and  his  apparent  conviction  that  the  matter  of  reality  can- 
not excite  wonder  will  somehow  not  let  him  find  wonder  to  be  a  quality  of  ei- 
kastic forms  like  history  or  philosophy.  He  has  both  to  warp  poetry  away  from 
its  nature  as  he  has  defmed  it  and  to  deny  perfect  imitation  to  eikastic  forms. 
I  think  we  have  seen  enough  in  Mazzoni  to  indicate  a  Bacon  firmly  in  a 
literary  as  well  as  a  philosophical  tradition,  one  that  debates  eikasia  as  science 
and  phantasia  as  poetry  and  the  means  of  developing  the  mind  to  use  both 
as  they  are  appropriate.  I  want  to  conclude  with  the  suggestion  that  Mazzoni 
is  closer  to  the  modern  sense  of  imagination  in  science  than  is  Bacon  with  his 
method  of  strict  induction.  Following  Paul  Ricoeur  we  can  see  in  Mazzoni  more 
of  a  dialectic  among  the  modes  of  discourse  — poetry,  philosophy,  and  history  — 
than  we  can  in  Bacon.  For  all  of  his  imaginativeness  as  a  writer,  Bacon  cannot 
see  how  the  richness  of  imagination  can  be  exploited  by  the  intellect's  "power 
of  distanciaton  that  opens  up  the  space  of  speculative  thought."^  It  appears 
that  Mazzoni  can. 

Cleveland  State  University 


Notes 


1.  The  Works  of  Francis  Bacon,  ed.  James  Spedding^/a/.  14  vols.  (London,  1857-1859), 
3:265.  All  further  citations  are  to  this  edition  and  will  appear  in  the  body  of  my  text. 

2.  On  this  distinction  in  sixteenth-century  literary  theory  see  Sir  Philip  Sidney,  An 
Apology  For  Poetry,  ed.  Geoffrey  Shepherd  (Edinburgh,  1965),  125  and  202  n.  25;  and 
Baxter  Hathaway,  Marvels  and  Commonplaces  (New  York,  1968),  44-45,  70,  and  73-75. 

3.  Francis  Bacon  und  seine  Schule,  Geschichte  der  neuern  Philosophie,  vol.  10  (Heidelberg, 
1923),  105-7,  109-11,  247-49;  and  Franz  Baco  von  Verulam:  Die  Realphilosophie  und  ihr 
Zeitalter  (Leipzig,  1856),  62,  translated  as  Francis  Bacon  of  Verulam:  Realistic  Philosophy 
and  its  Age  by  John  Oxenford  (London,  1857),  67. 

4.  On  the  complicated  topic  of  false  and  true  uses  of  the  imagination  see  Katherine 
Park,  "Bacon's 'Enchanted  Glass,'" /jw,  75,  no.  277  (June,  1984),  290-302,  where  Park 


674  MAZZONI  AND  BACON 


displays  the  Janus-like  imagination  contemplated  by  Bacon,  a  function  of  imagination 
expressed  in  phantastic  and  eikastic  imitation. 

5.  Murray  Wright  Bundy,  "Bacon's  True  Opinion  of  Poetry,"  SP,  27  (1930),  251; 
Sidney,  28  and  166  n.  3;  and  Hathaway,  101-5. 

6.  The  complicated  matter  of  the  search  for  Bacon's  sources  can  be  dealt  with  neither 
in  this  paper  nor  in  this  note.  A  single  example  of  a  typical  conclusion  will  have  to  stand 
for  the  general  approach.  In  "Bacon's  'Enchanted  Glass,'  "  Katherine  Park,  showing 
that  Galen's  scheme  of  the  mind  was  transmitted  by  Juan  de  Huarte's  Examen  de  ingenios 
(Pamplona,  1578;  trans.  Edward  Bellamy,  London,  1608),  comments,  "Substantial  inter- 
nal evidence  suggests  that  Bacon  knew  Huarte's  work  and  drew  heavily  on  it."  In  his 
Chapter  VII,  "How  there  may  be  assigned  to  everie  difference  of  wit  his  Science.  .  .," 
102-19,  Huarte  indeed  correlates  faculties  of  mind  with  fields  of  knowledge  in  a  way 
analogous  to  Bacon's,  but  Huarte's  treatment  of  memory  is  very  different  from  Bacon's. 
Curiously,  the  closest  analogue  remains  Spenser's  in  Faerie  Queene,  2.9.  We  can  mainly 
assert  strong  circumstantial  connections.  Before  now,  however,  no  one  has  elaborated 
the  connections  to  literary  critics. 

7.  A  History  of  Literary  Criticism  in  the  Italian  Renaissance  (Chicago,  1961),  1:1-37. 

8.  Weinberg,  2,  Chapters  16  and  17. 

9.  See  especially  Patrizi's  Delia  poetica  a  cura  di  Danilo  Aguzzi  Barbagli  (Firenze 
1969-1971),  2:277-79,  293,  298-300,  and  307,  which  treat  imitation. 

10.  The  Delia  difesa  was  published  twice,  seven  books  in  Cesena  in  1597  and  these 
together  with  four  previously  unpublished  books  in  Cesena  in  1688. 

11.  Weinberg,  1:24-26. 

12.  See,  for  example,  pp.  145,  152-53,  170-73,  and  393-94. 

13.  The  Rule  of  Metaphor,  trans.  Robert  Czerny  (Toronto,  1984),  313.  And  see  Mur- 
ray Krieger,  "Jacopo  Mazzoni,  Repository  of  Diverse  Critical  Traditions  or  Source  of 
a  New  One?"  in  Poetic  Presence  and  Illusion  (Baltimore,  1979),  28-38,  where  Krieger  Char- 
acterizes Mazzonis'  theories  as  anticipations  of  later,  modem,  critical  concerns,  and 
Robert  L.  Montgomery's  introduction  to  Jacopo  Mazzoni,  On  the  Defense  of  the  Comedy 
of  Dante:  Introduction  and  Summary  (Tallahassee,  1983),  21-24,  where  Montgomery  car- 
ries Krieger's  argument  into  a  discussion  of  Mcizzoni's  form  of  didacticism. 


"True  Philosophy"  in  the  Continental 
Legal  Tradition 

Roger  T.  Simonds 

Recent  scholarship  has  drawn  attention  to  the  fact  that  certain  Re- 
naissance jurists  seem  to  identify  legal  science  or  jurisprudence  with 
"true  philosophy,"  that  they  emphasize  the  self-sufficiency  of  legal 
science,  and  that  they  even  go  so  far  as  to  suggest  that  legal  science  embraces 
all  other  disciplines  in  principle.  Such  claims  are  astonishing  at  first  sight,  and 
one  contemporary  American  scholar  has  ridiculed  them  as  "self-confidence  and 
intellectual  imperialism"  derived  from  "an  elitism  accompanied  by  a  sense  of 
rank  that  often  bordered  on  the  ridiculous."  It  was  ^academic  snobbery"  that 
animated  the  Renaissance  jurists.  Since  their  first  allegiance  was  to  their  own 
discipline  rather  than  to  the  republic  of  letters,  "they  had  their  own  questions 
and  answers,  their  own  methods  and  goals,  their  own  language  and  philos- 
ophy. It  is  no  wonder  that,  like  other  academic  chauvinists,  they  believed  that 
their  philosophy  was  the  true  philosophy."^ 

This  rather  harsh  judgment  is  based  on  a  misunderstanding.  When  Renais- 
sance jurists  spoke  of  their  own  discipline  in  philosophical  terms,  which  in  fact 
they  rarely  did,  it  was  not  because  they  wanted  to  defend  their  academic  area 
against  encroachments  from  philosophers  or  theologians.  It  was  because  they 
had  to  explain  the  references  to  philosophy  and  theology  in  classical  legcd  li- 
terature. And  it  should  be  no  surprise  that  they  had  some  difficulty  under- 
standing those  references.  Their  own  ideas  about  philosophy  and  theology,  after 
all,  were  conditioned  by  the  lapse  of  a  thousand  years  beyond  the  time  of  the 
sources  they  were  studying.  On  the  whole,  they  were  not  philosophers  or  theolo- 
gians either  by  training  or  by  instinct.  They  grappled  with  those  thorny  sub- 
jects only  to  the  extent  that  their  professional  duties  required;  and  when  they 
did  so,  they  had  only  their  legal  training  to  fall  back  on. 

Consider  the  case  of  Barthelemy  de  Chasseneux,  whose  Catalog  of  the  Glories 
of  the  World  (Catalogus  gloriae  mundt)  was  published  in  1546.  Here  we  find  some 
commentary  on  the  famous  first  title  of  Justinian's  Digest.  This  title  begins 
with  a  text  from  Ulpian  which  compares  lawyers  with  priests,  on  the  ground 


676  THE  CONTINENTAL  LEGAL  TRADITIONS 

that  they  concern  themselves  with  justice,  goodness,  equity  and  "true  philos- 
ophy." De  Chasseneux  opens  his  commentary  by  saying  that  theology,  juris- 
prudence and  philosophy  can  best  be  called  liberal  arts;  yet  (he  goes  on), 
properly  speaking,  they  are  not  arts  but  true  sciences  {verae  scientiae);  never- 
theless (he  concludes),  the  science  or  profession  of  law  is  said  to  be  a  liberal 
art  or  liberal  study  {studium  liberale).  In  support  of  this  wonderfully  elusive  po- 
sition he  then  cites,  without  actually  quoting  them,  three  texts  from  Justin- 
ian's Code.  Next,  he  mentions  that  the  law  (lex)  is  also  called  a  "morail  science" 
(moralis  scientia)  according  to  the  gloss  on  a  text  on  marriage  in  the  Novels. 
"And  in  the  whole  body  of  law,"  he  continues,  "true  theology  is  found  and  is 
taught  when  the  law's  precepts  agree  with  those  of  divinity"  {Et  in  toto  corpore 
iuris  vera  theologia  invenitur  &  docetur,  cum  eius  praecepta  cum  divinis  concordant)} 
Here  he  cites  the  maxims  about  jurisprudence  at  the  beginning  of  the  Insti- 
tutes and  the  Digest.  It  is  noteworthy  that  de  Chasseneux  solves  the  problem 
of  Ulpian's  reference  to  "true  philosophy"  by  simply  ignoring  it.  Moreover,  his 
own  proposition  is  virtually  non-committal;  it  says  only  that  true  theology  can 
be  learned  from  the  law  when  the  law  agrees  with  true  theology. 

This  is  a  much  weaker  position  than  that  of  the  thirteenth-century  Accur- 
sian  gloss  on  the  same  title  (D  1,1,10,2  =  1  l,l,pr.),  which  contains  Ulpian's 
defmition  of  jurisprudence:  "Jurisprudence  is  the  knowledge  of  both  divine  and 
human  affairs,  the  science  of  the  just  and  the  unjust"  {Iuris  prudentia  est  divi- 
narum  atque  humanarum  rerum  notitia,  iusti  atque  iniusti  scientia).  Here  the  gloss  in- 
quires, fastening  on  the  word  "knowledge"  {notitia),  whether  anyone  who  wants 
to  become  a  jurist  must  read  theology.  The  gloss  says  no,  "for  all  things  are 
found  in  the  body  of  the  law"  {nam  omnis[s\c\  in  corpore  iuris  inveniuntur) ,  citing 
titles  three,  four  and  five  of  the  first  book  of  the  Code  (and  the  Novels  gen- 
erally without  specific  reference),  which  concern  the  articles  of  Christian  belief 
and  the  orgcinization  of  the  Church.^  It  did  not  bother  Accursius,  apparently, 
that  these  provisions  dated  back  to  the  sixth  century  and  earlier,  nor  did  it 
occur  to  him  to  argue  the  question  on  philosophical  grounds.  We  may  con- 
clude, then,  that  the  sixteenth-century  jurist,  de  Chasseneux,  was  much  less 
confident  that  the  Corpus  Juris  contained  all  true  theology  than  was  the 
thirteenth-century  glossator,  Accursius. 

In  the  text  at  the  beginning  of  the  Digest,  alluded  to  earlier,  Ulpian  first 
gives  a  definition  of  law  {ius)  by  the  early  second-century  jurist  Celsus,  that 
law  is  the  art  of  the  good  and  the  equitable  {ars  boni  et  aequi).  Then  he  continues 
(D  1,1,1,1): 

By  virtue  of  this,  he  calls  us  priests:  for  we  cultivate  justice  and  profess 
a  knowledge  of  the  good  and  the  equitable,  separating  the  equitable  from 
the  inequitable,  distinguishing  the  licit  from  the  illicit,  desiring  to  bring 
about  good  deeds  not  only  by  the  threat  of  punishments  but  also  by  the 
encouragement  of  rewards,  affecting  (if  I  am  not  mistaken)  the  true 


ROGER  T.    SIMONDS  677 

philosophy,  not  a  counterfeit  {veram  nisi  Jailor  philosophiam,  non  simulatam 
affectantes). 

Were  it  not  for  the  last  phrase,  one  might  easily  suppose  that  Ulpian  is  saying 
that  lawyers  are  the  custodians  of  the  absolute  truth,  which  would  be  a  brazen 
usurpation  of  the  domain  of  philosophy  and  theology.  In  that  case  it  would 
be  paradoxical,  of  course,  to  add  the  qualifying  clause,  "if  I  am  not  mistaken." 
If  I  really  am  the  custodian  of  truth,  how  could  I  be  mistaken?  One  might 
dismiss  that  clause  as  a  rhetorical  flourish,  a  bow  in  the  direction  of  conven- 
tional modesty.  But  such  an  interpretation  collapses  when  we  come  to  the  fmal 
three  words  ("not  affecting  a  counterfeit").  These  words  set  up  an  obvious  an- 
tithesis between  "true  philosophy"  and  "counterfeit  philosophy,"  which  shows 
that  we  must  take  the  word  'true'  in  the  sense  of  "genuine,"  "authentic"  or  "real," 
not  in  the  sense  of  "correct,"  "accurate"  or  "valid."  The  "true  philosophy"  in 
Ulpian's  text  is  not  the  philosophy  certified  to  represent  reality;  it  is  rather  the 
philosophy  which  is  unfeigned,  the  philosophy  we  actually  believe.  With  this 
interpretation,  one  can  see  why  the  founders  of  Western  legal  science  claimed 
to  be  custodians  of  "true  philosophy."  They  were  talking  about  philosophy  as 
practised,  not  philosophy  as  preached.  In  the  law,  one  does  not  deal  merely 
with  abstract  ethical  principles  or  general  rules  of  interpretation;  one  has  to 
fmd  specific  solutions  in  particular  cases.  The  way  actual  cases  are  resolved 
reveals  that  "true"  philosophy  more  reliably  than  the  writings  of  the  philos- 
ophers themselves. 

The  gloss  does  not  quite  grasp  this  point.  Fastening  upon  Ulpian's  phrase, 
"if  I  am  not  mistaken"  {nisi Jailor) ,  the  gloss  says,  "In  no  way  am  I  mistaken: 
for  civil  wisdom  [civilis  sapientia]  is  said  to  be  true  philosophy,  that  is,  the  love 
of  wisdom,"  citing  a  text  (D  50, 13, 1 ,5)  in  the  Digest.  That  text,  however,  merely 
says  that  lawyers,  unlike  philosophers  who  receive  money  for  tutoring,  are  not 
to  be  treated  as  merchants;  for  while  it  may  be  honorable  for  them  to  receive 
a  fee  for  their  services,  it  is  not  honorable  for  them  to  demand  it.  From  this 
the  glossator  might  have  inferred  that  the  legal  profession  is  more  philosoph- 
ical than  the  philosophers  themselves  are.  But  he  missed  the  point  of  Ulpian's 
dictum.  Was  it  perhaps  that  a  thirteenth-century  scholar  could  hardly  imagine 
why  anyone  might  want  to  "affect"  a  philosophy  which  he  did  not  really  be- 
lieve, while  a  second-century  jurist  could  very  well  imagine  it?  There  was  a 
notorious  occasion  in  the  year  155  B.C.,  when  the  prominent  Academic  phi- 
losopher Carneades  gave  two  public  lectures  at  Rome,  the  second  lecture  ar- 
guing for  the  opposite  of  the  position  adopted  in  the  first.  It  was  an  obvious 
feature  of  the  classical  tradition  of  rhetoric  and  oratory  that  the  student  was 
expected  to  be  able  to  attack  propositions  which  he  personally  accepted  and 
to  defend  propositions  which  he  personally  rejected.  The  pedagogical  value 
of  having  students  argue  hypothetical  positions  was  certainly  well  known  to 
the  glossators,  since  mock  trials  were  an  important  feature  of  the  curriculum 


678  THE  CONTINENTAL  LEGAL  TRADITIONS 

for  law  Students  at  Bologna;  and  indeed  this  mock  trial  technique  was  taken 
over  by  the  scholastic  theologians  and  philosophers  cind  shows  itself  in  the  li- 
terary form  of  St.  Thomas'  Summa  Theologica,  for  example.'^  However,  it  seems 
that  the  glossators  themselves  did  not  associate  the  idea  of  the  mock  trial  with 
the  idea  of  arguing  philosophical  or  theological  points;  such  arguments,  they 
might  well  have  assumed,  are  best  left  to  the  professionals. 

What  is  more  surprising  is  that  the  same  attitude  persists  in  certain  ways 
in  the  Renaissance,  when  one  might  have  expected  it  to  vanish  v^th  the  rising 
awareness  of  the  classical  traditions  of  rhetoric  and  philosophical  dialogue.  Two 
prominent  Renaissance  jurists,  Boniface  Amerbach  and  Andrea  Alciati,  offer 
examples  of  this  attitude. 

Amerbach  was  a  close  friend  of  Erasmus  and,  as  might  be  expected,  a  hu- 
manist and  connoisseur  of  classical  letters  as  well  as  a  lawyer.  Nevertheless, 
he  found  himself  on  the  defensive  when  the  literature  and  methods  of  juris- 
prudence came  under  attack  from  certain  humanists,  led  by  Valla  and  Bude. 
His  inaugural  lecture  at  the  University  of  Basel  in  1525  is  a  passionate  defense 
of  the  traditional  role  of  the  glossators  and  commentators  and  a  counterattack 
against  these  latter-day  critics,  whom  he  does  not  name.  The  critics'  complaint, 
according  to  Amerbach,  was  that  the  glossators  and  commentators,  like  Ac- 
cursius,  Bartolus,  Baldus,  Paolo  de  Castro  and  Alessandro  da  Imola, 

in  their  "infinite"  (as  they  say)  commentaries  and  opinions  make  the  clear 
things  obscure,  the  lucid  shadowy,  the  plain  intricate,  the  certain  dub- 
ious, the  orderly  confused,  the  equitable  iniquitous,  all  for  the  hope  of 
a  little  limelight;  and  .  .  .  [that]  they  also  run  afoul  of  our  Prince  Jus- 
tinian's edict  in  his  law  on  the  enucleation  of  the  ancient  jurists  [C 
1,17,21],  in  the  name  of  which  all  of  their  volumes  of  precepts  should 
be  abolished  or  rather  condemned  as  falsifications.^ 

Amerbach's  defense  against  these  complaints  is,  first,  that  new  commentar- 
ies will  always  be  needed  because  new  situations  are  always  cropping  up,  which 
must  be  interpreted  in  the  light  of  legal  traditions.  Although  he  does  not  say 
so,  this  echoes  a  well  known  dictum  in  Justinian's  Constitution  Tanta  (C 
1,17,2,18),  to  the  effect  that  human  law  is  always  "running  away  into  inde- 
finiteness"  (semper  in  infinitum  decurrit)  and  contains  nothing  absolutely  perpet- 
ual, "for  nature  hastens  to  produce  many  new  forms"  {multas  etenimfonnas  edere 
natura  novas  deproperat).  Then,  tacitly  alluding  to  Aristotle's  discussion  of  equity 
in  the  Nicomachean  Ethics  (5.10),  Amerbach  says  that  the  commentators  do 
not  m2ike  new  laws  but  "adapt  [the  classical  laws]  like  the  Lesbian  rule  to  the 
infinity  of  facts  according  to  the  various  circumstances."  He  admits  that  there 
is  a  variety  of  opinions  among  the  commentators,  but  argues  that  this  is  more 
of  a  help  than  a  hindrance  to  the  student.  As  for  the  complaint  that  Justinian 
himself  forbade  interpretations,  the  reply  is  that  such  a  prohibition,  taken  li- 
terally, would  make  jurisprudence  impossible. 


ROGER  T.    SIMONDS  679 

And  why  should  we  say  that  [interpretation]  is  denied,  when  necessity 
requires  it  and  when  Justinian  in  his  rescripts,  unless  we  admitted  it, 
would  be  stabbing  himself  with  his  own  point,  he  who  time  and  again 
professed  that  there  is  no  antinomy  or  contradiction  in  his  volumes,  al- 
though there  are  so  many  texts  which,  without  interpretation,  would  seem 
to  be  repugnancies? 

Then  Amerbach  gives  several  examples  of  the  techniques  of  reconciling  con- 
flicting texts.  He  does  not,  however,  call  attention  to  the  classical  idea  that 
jurisprudence,  in  its  own  nature,  is  a  philosophical  discipline  and  that  it  must 
therefore  be  open  to  rational  exploration  and  discussion  among  the  learned. 
That  he  was  aware  of  this  idea  can  hardly  be  doubted,  but  his  explicit  argu- 
ments are  in  terms  of  the  technical  and  practical  uses  of  the  traditional  me- 
thods. In  fact,  there  is  a  letter  from  Amerbach  to  the  philosopher  Telesio  (August 
1531)  in  which  he  says  that  one  should  look  to  philosophy  (meaning  primarily 
Plato  and  Aristotle)  more  than  to  the  legal  commentators,  like  Bartolus  and 
Baldus,  for  guidance  in  problems  of  legal  interpretation.^ 

Perhaps  Amerbach  felt  that  too  much  emphasis  on  the  philosophiccd  char- 
acter of  legal  thinking  would  not  sit  well  with  his  audience.  This  possibility 
is  suggested  in  some  remarks  by  Amerbach's  friend,  the  jurist  and  poet  An- 
drea Alciati,  in  a  speech  given  at  the  beginning  of  Alciati's  lectures  on  civil 
law  at  Avignon  in  1518.  He  says: 

I  come  now  to  Philosophy,  which  is  so  intimately  connected  with  this 
profession  that  the  one  can  in  no  way  exist  without  the  other.  For  what 
is  inherent  in  justice  is  indeed  what  true  Philosophy  is.  Therefore  the 
lawgivers  themselves  are  true  philosophers.  .  .  .  But  the  ancients  were  not 
thinking  of  those  hackneyed  altercations  about  the  universe,  about  mat- 
ter, about  ideas,  about  causes,  about  the  void,  about  motion,  and  other 
things  of  that  sort  whether  physical  or  metaphysical,  since  they  have  no- 
thing to  do  with  true  wisdom,  whether  because  of  their  uncertainty  or 
because  that  alone  is  true  philosophy  which  makes  men  upright,  honest 
and  uncorrupted:  a  benefit  which  derives  very  little  from  those  debates.^ 

Alciati  thus  practicsdly  reduces  "true  philosophy"  to  moral  philosophy  and  as- 
serts that  physics  and  metaphysics  have  nothing  to  do  with  it.^  Speculative 
philosophy,  in  short,  is  not  true  philosophy,  both  because  it  is  uncertain  and 
because  it  contributes  littie  to  the  attainment  of  the  good  life.  Implicitly,  there- 
fore, "true  philosophy"  is  both  certain  and  morally  beneficial. 

These  ideas  are  quite  remote  from  the  remark  on  "true  philosophy"  in  Jus- 
tinian's Digest.  There,  it  is  neither  the  certitude  nor  the  salubrity  of  a  philos- 
ophy that  makes  it  "true,"  but  rather  it  is  "true"  by  virtue  of  its  authenticity. 
Alciati's  ideas  are  still  further  removed  from  the  classical  Greek  and  Roman 
philosophers,  for  whom  the  distinction  between  speculative  and  practic2il  phi- 


680  THE  CONTINENTAL  LEGAL  TRADITIONS 

losophy  was  never  so  sharp.  For  Socrates  and  Plato,  the  good  Hfe  was  the  ex- 
amined life,  and  there  was  no  way  to  obtain  knowledge  of  the  good  other  than 
the  way  of  philosophical  speculation.  For  Aristotle,  the  categories  of  specul- 
ative description  and  explanation  were  the  same  as  the  categories  of  practical 
judgment;  the  difference  between  the  speculative  and  the  practical  was  only 
the  difference  between  principles  as  objects  of  inquiry  and  principles  as  pre- 
mises for  reasoning.  Some  of  the  Sophists,  to  be  sure,  regarded  practical  prin- 
ciples as  mere  conventions  and  thus  divorced  from  any  speculative  basis; 
however,  this  was  not  to  give  them  any  new  basis  of  their  own.  In  the  Re- 
naissance, practical  principles  are  considered  to  be  independent  of  speculative 
ones  and  even,  according  to  some  writers,  superior  to  them.  Pietro  Pompo- 
nazzi,  for  example,  rejects  Aristotle's  idea  that  the  essential  attribute  of  man 
is  his  speculative  intelligence;  for  he  thinks  that  intelligence  is  the  property  only 
of  a  few,  while  moral  virtue  can  belong  to  anyone.  Therefore,  he  reasons,  Ar- 
istotle was  wrong  to  make  intellectual  virtue  superior  to  moral  virtue;  he  had 
it  backwards. ^^ 

Pomponazzi's  reversal  of  the  standpoint  of  classical  moral  philosophy  should 
not  be  surprising,  because  it  was  implicit  in  Christian  doctrine  from  the  be- 
ginning. St.  Paul  says  (Colossians  2:8),  "Beware  lest  any  man  spoil  you  through 
philosophy  and  vain  deceit,  2ifter  the  tradition  of  men,  after  the  rudiments  of 
the  world,  and  not  after  Christ."  This  statement  was  interpreted  by  some  of 
the  Church  Fathers,  with  the  notable  exceptions  of  Origen  and  Augustine,  as 
a  blanket  condemnation  of  philosophy;^ ^  and  indeed  the  letters  of  Paul  are  full 
of  disapproval  of  what  he  calls  "the  wisdom  of  the  world."  The  early  Church 
Fathers  tended  to  blame  Greek  philosophy  for  the  spread  of  Gnosticism  and 
the  various  heretical  movements,  while  at  the  same  time  they  freely  borrowed 
from  Greek  philosophy  much  of  the  terminology  and  even  some  of  the  sub- 
stance of  their  own  theology. ^^  The  revival  of  interest  in  classical  philosophy 
during  the  Renaissance,  therefore,  when  culture  and  learning  were  still  dom- 
inated by  theology  and  religious  tradition,  could  not  lead  immediately  to  a  re- 
vival of  systematic  speculative  philosophy  as  such.  Its  tendency  was,  rather, 
to  redeem  the  classical  writers  by  reading  Christian  values  into  their  works, 
as  one  sees  clearly  in  Erasmus'  colloquy,  "A  Godly  Feast,"  where  Socrates  is 
canonized  by  one  of  the  speakers.  When  at  length  speculative  philosophy  re- 
vived, as  it  did  under  the  name  of  science  or  "natural  philosophy,"  the  unfor- 
tunate divorce  of  practical  from  speculative  reason  persisted  in  most  of  the  newly 
proposed  philosphical  systems,  and  indeed  it  persists  in  modern  philosophy 
to  the  present  day. 

The  effects  of  this  pseudo-logical  dualism  are  many.  In  modern  philosophy 
it  has  not  only  separated  moral  concepts  from  their  roots  in  logic,  semantics 
and  metaphysics,  but  it  has  also  isolated  philosophical  thinking  generally  from 
one  of  its  main  sources  of  information  and  insight,  namely,  legal  experience 
and  legal  literature.  After  Francis  Bacon,  who  was  professionally  trained  as 


ROGER  T.    SIMONDS  68l 

a  lawyer,  knowledge  of  legal  theory  and  legal  literature  declined  sharply  among 
the  modern  European  philosophers,  to  the  point  that  today  such  knowledge 
is  not  even  reckoned  to  be  an  important  part  of  the  intellectual  equipment  of 
the  ordinary  well-educated  person.  The  consequence  is  that  many  discussions 
in  classical  legal  literature  on  important  questions  of  continuing  interest  to  mo- 
dern philosophers,  questions  concerning  metaphysics,  epistemology  and  her- 
meneutics,  are  now  largely  unknown  to  those  who  could  most  benefit  from  them. 
I  have  argued  here  that  the  phrase  'true  philosoph/  in  Ulpian's  famous  re- 
mark on  lawyers  refers  to  the  authenticity,  not  the  validity,  of  the  philosophy 
represented  in  legal  practice.  I  have  not  attempted  to  describe  what  that  phi- 
losophy was.  But  in  the  Renaissance,  I  have  suggested,  the  "true"  philosophy 
would  naturally  be  identified  as  the  orthodox  teachings  of  the  Church  Uni- 
versal, and  this  would  create  puzzlement  as  to  why  classic2d  lawyers  appointed 
themselves  guardians  of  this  orthodoxy.  Some  Renaissance  theorists,  like  Am- 
erbach,  studiously  avoid  the  problem  by  concentrating  on  technicalities.  Oth- 
ers, like  Alciati,  solve  it  by  interpreting  'true  philosophy'  as  moral  philosophy, 
dismissing  the  speculative  side  of  philosophy  as  irrelevant  or  inferior,  an  at- 
titude most  likely  derived  from  that  of  the  Church  Fathers. 

The  American  University 


Notes 


1.  Donald  R.  Kelley,  "Vera  Philosophia:  The  Philosophical  Significance  of  Renais- 
sance Jurisprudence,"  youma/  of  the  History  of  Philosophy  14  (1976):  269. 

2.  D.  Bartholomaei  Chassanaei  Burgundii,  Catalogus  gloriae  mundi  (Lyons,  1546),  fol. 
187r. 

3.  Corpus  iuris  civilis  (Venice,  1592):  D  1,1,10,2  gl.  notitia. 

4.  Hermann  Kantorowicz,  Studies  in  the  Glossators  of  the  Roman  Law  (Cambridge:  At 
the  University  Press,  1938),  p.  82. 

5.  Alfred  Hartmann,  Die  Amerbachkorrespondenz  (Basel:  Verlag  der  Universitatsbib- 
liothek,  1942-1958),  3:555.  Translation  is  mine. 

6.  Ibid.,  558.  Translation  is  mine. 

7.  Ibid.,  4:67. 

8.  Andrea  Alciati,  "Oratio  in  laudem  iuris  civilis,  principio  studii  habita,  cum  Aven- 
ione  profiteretur,"  Reliqua  .  .  .  opera  (Lyons,  1548),  cols.  67-68.  Translation  is  mine. 

9.  Kelley,  "Vera  Philosophia,"  p.  268,  notes  a  general  tendency  among  Renaissance 
writers  to  this  effect. 

10.  Pietro  Pomponazzi,  Tractatus  de  immortalitate  animae,  ed.  G.  Morra  (Bologna:  Nanni 
&  Fiammenghi,  1954),  chap.  14.  Translated  in  Cassirer,  E.,  P.  O.  Kristeller,  and  J. 
H.  Randall,  Jr.,  eds.,  The  Renaissance  Philosophy  of  Man  (Chicago:  University  of  Chi- 
cago Press,  1948),  pp.  353-63. 


682  THE  CONTINENTAL  LEGAL  TRADITIONS 

11.  Harry  Austryn  Wolfson,  The  Philosophy  of  the  Church  Fathers,  vol.  I:  Faith,  Trinity, 
Incarnation  (Cambridge:  Harvard  University  Press,  1956),  p.  99  ff. 

12.  Ibid.,  p.  559  ff. 


Index 


This  index  is  generally  limited  to  proper  names  of  individuals  ancient,  medieval,  early 
modern,  who  figure  in  some  substantive  way  in  the  various  papers.  Several  disparate 
categories  of  names  have  been  omitted  —  the  names  of  mythological  or  biblical  figures 
or  of  characters  or  of  modern  historians  or  critics.  So  have  most  of  the  names  men- 
tioned in  passing  or  cited  in  footnotes.  Within  these  limits,  we  have  tended  to  be  in- 
clusive rather  than  exclusive.  The  forms  used  in  the  index  have  been  largely  but  not 
entirely  anglicized;  those  arguably  subject  to  alternative  renderings  (Vergil/ Virgil)  have 
been  defined  by  the  coordinating  editor.  It  should  not  tax  any  reader's  imagination  to 
guess  at  the  complexities  involved  in  synthesizing  the  index  information  provided  by 
many  authors,  several  editors,  and  several  assistants. 


Abad,  Diego  Jose  617-23; 
-De  Deo,  Deoque  Homine  Heroica 

619-22 
Accademia  degli  Infiammati  244 
Accursius  676 
Adrian  VI  (Pope)  51-53 
Aegidius  Romanus  523 
Aemilius  Lepidus,  Marcus  55,  56,  58, 

59 
Aesop  543 

Agricola,  R.  8,  189,  201 
Alamanni,  Cosmas  579f. 
Albergati,  Nicolo  470 
Alberich  v.  Monte  Cassino  505 
Albericus  dux  1 19 
Albert  of  Bavaria  171,  173 
Alberti,  Leon  Battista  471,  587,  590, 

592,  593 
Albertus  Magnus  181,  182,  184,  187 
Albrecht  v.  Eyb  11 
Albrecht,  P.  307 
Alciati,  Andrea  141,  193-200,  316, 

329,  678.  679,  681; 


—  "Oratio  in  laudem  iuris  civilis"  679; 

—  Emblemata  316 
Alcuin  262,  268 
Aldana,  F.  383 
Aleander,  G.  138f. 
Alegambe,  Ph.  385 

Alegre,  Francisco  Javier  617,  619 

Alesius,  Nicolaus  275 

Alessandro  da  Imola  678 

Alexander  de  Villa  Dei  516,  517,  519 

Alexander  the  Great  35,  487 

Alstedt,  J.  H.  425 

Alt,  G.  10,  11 

Amerbach,  Basil  193,  194,  196 

Amerbach,  Boniface  193-200,  678,  679 

Amerbach,  Bruno  193,  194 

Amerinus,  Johannes  Laurentius  275 

Amyot,  J.  481,  482 

Aneau,  Barthelemy  316,  329; 

—  Picta  Poesis  316 
Antolin,  G.  28 
Antony,  Marc  301 
Apuleius  9,  34 


684 


INDEX 


Aquinas,  St.  Thomas  400,  469f.,  576, 
578,  579,  589,  637,  659-61,  678 

Arator  403-6,  416 

Ariosto,  L.  129,  423,  488 

Aristippos  486 

Aristophanes  3,  290,  533,  534,  538, 
539 

Aristotle  37,  65,  81,  114,  128,  181, 
182,  184,  187,  189,  223,  226,  230, 
252,  347,  403,  407,  414,  415,  422, 
434,  459,  522,  523,  525,  541-44, 
546-49,  559,  564,  574-76,  578, 
584,  629,  655,  669,  678-80; 

-Ethics  556,  557 

Arnauld,  Antoine  438,  453,  461 

Arriaga,  Rodericus  579 

Arrighi,  Lodovico  degli,  da  Vicenza 
431 

Ascham,  Roger  660 

Asconius  656 

Asnethe  261,  262,  265 

Augustine,  St.  34,  104,  292,  315, 
321,  585,  588,  589,  637,  669,  680 

Augustus  Caesar  74,  301,  377 

Aurelius  C.  201 

Aurelius,  Julianus  101 

Ausonius  71 

Avantius,  Hieronymus  47,  52,  138 

Averroes  637 

Avianus,  J.  156 

Avicenna  635,  636,  638-40; 

—  Philosophia  prima,  640 

Backer,  Aloys  de  579 
Bacon,  Francis  667,  680; 
—Advancement  of  Learning  667; 

—  De  augmentis  scientiarum  668,  669; 

—  Novum  organum  667,  669 
Bacon,  Roger  216 
Badius  Ascensius  139,  141 
Baebler,  J.  J.  518 

Baif,  Jean-Antoine  de  64 

Baif,  Lazare  440,  450 

Balbo,  Scipio  432 

Balde,  J.  119,  125,  154,  384-86,  389, 

390 
Baldus  678,  679 
Bandini,  Domenico  138 
Bandinius,  A.  M.  28 
Barbaro,  Ermolao  556 
Barbe,  Hie  140,  144 


Barclay,  Alexander  376,  382 

Barclays,  J.  385 

Barizza,  Gasparino  523,  524 

Barlandus,  A.  202,  203 

Barth,  Caspar  von  26,  389 

Barthius,  C.  445,  448,  450-52; 

—Adversaria  450f. 

Bartolini,  M.  34 

Bartolini,  R.  34-43,  171-80 

Bartolus  of  Sassoferrato  678,  679 

Batmanson,  J.  511 

Baumgartner,  A.  384 

Bebel,  H.  195 

Becanus,  G.  154 

Bede  262,  268 

Bellay,  Joachim  du  64 

Belleau,  Remy  64 

Bembo,  P.  422 

Bentivoglio,  H.  129 

Berchorius,  P.  121,  122 

Bernhardt,  G.  297 

Bernard,  St.  278 

Beroalde  de  Verville  8,  417 

Beroaldo,  F.  141,  144 

Berti,  Gasparre  577 

Bertulphus,  Hilarius  432 

Berzsenyi,  D.  158 

Beza,  Theodore  141,  353-63,  649; 

—  Psalmorum  Davidis  .  .  .  libri  355-58; 

-Poems  358-60 

Bezzola,  G.  30 

Bidez,  Joseph  27,  29-31 

Bindseil,  H.  E.  514,  518,  519,  538 

Biondo,  F.  11,  201 

Bione,  C.  213 

Birck,  Sixt  534 

Biro,  I.  159 

Bisselius,  J.  383-93 

Bitaud,  Jean  226 

Blainville  339,  342,  343,  350 

Blauers,  The  659 

Blotius,  H.  482 

Blumenberg,  Hans  275 

Boccaccio,  Giovanni  28,  104,  105, 

121,  122,  138,  142,  377,  409,  411 
Boccaferrea,  Ludovicus  515 
Bodin,  J.  201,  203 
Boeckh,  A.  212 

Boethius  71,  141,  266,  359,  522 
Boleyn,  Anne  369 
Bonade,  Francois  71,  354 


INDEX 


685 


Bonaventure,  St.  278 

Bonomus,  P.  41 

Bonvesin  de  la  Riva  11 

Bornemann,  U.  205 

Boscovich,  R.  155 

Boussard,  Jacques  28 

Bovelles,  Charles  de  441,  443-45 

Brahe,  Tycho  223,  272 

Bramhall,  John  236-38 

Brant,  S.  182-84,  186 

Breccia,  A.  E.  213 

Brenz,  J.  648 

Brie,  G.  de  512 

Brucioli,  A.  649 

Bruckner,  J.  655 

Brueghel,  Pieter  (The  Elder)  546 

Bruni,  L.  11,  41,  339,  585 

Bruno,  G.  247,  423 

Bucer,  Martin  166,  354 

Buchanan,  George  63,  64,  71-79, 

140,  163,  166-68,  354,  366; 
-Baptistes  163-67,  169; 
-Jephthes  163,  166-69; 

—  Psalm  Paraphrases  11-11  \ 

—  Iphigeneia  163,  167; 

—  letters  163,  166 

Bude,  Guillaume  36,  81,  124,  141, 
143,  440,  442,  453,  491-501,  511, 
641,  642,  645,  648,  649,  659,  678; 

—  De  philologia,  491-501 
Bugenhagen,  J.  512 
Bullinger,  H.  72,  648 
Burckhardt,  J.  592 
Buschius,  H.  95 

Caesar  11,  216,  289,  291,  294,  299, 

377,  535-37 
Cajetan,  Th.  648 

Calpurnius  Siculus,  C.  270,  273,  377 
Calvin,  Jean  353 
Calvus,  F.  195-97 
Camerarius,  Joachim  293,  315,  316, 

329 
Camoeno,  F.  37 
Campbell,  Lome  471 
Campbell,  W.  E.  397,  400 
Campensis,  J.  354,  356 
Campoy,  Jose  Rafael  617 
Cantiuncula,  C.  195,  199 
Cantu,  C.  383 
Cameades  655,  677 


Caro,  A.  482 

Cartari,  Vincenzo  100-104 

Castellio,  S.  649 

Castiglione,  Baldassare  299-305 

Castiglione,  Ippolita  299-305 

Castilio  77 

Catharinus,  A.  568 

Cato  318,  415 

Cats,  Jacob  262,  268 

Catullus  45-53,  73,  143,  159,  387 

Caxton,  William  525 

Cazree,  Pierre  228 

Ceard,  Jean  64 

Celsus  676 

Celtis,  Conrad  7-15,  34,  39,  95, 

185-89,  524 
Cervantes  376 
Ceva,  Th.  154 

Charlemagne  12,  144,  289,  377 
Charles  I  108,  233,  239 
Charles  III,  340,  348,  349,  617 
Charles  V  34,  35,  55,  145-51,  199 
Charpin  (Charpinus),  Etienne  140 
Charron,  P.  581,  599,  602 
Chasseneux  (Chassaneius),  Barthe- 

lemy  de  675,  676,  681; 

—  Catalogus  gloriae  mundi  676 
Chaucer,  Geoffrey  396 
Cheke,  Sir  John  660 
Chrestien,  Florent  354 

Christian  III  (King  of  Denmark)  270, 
271 

Christian  IV  (King  of  Denmark)  273 

Christiani,  Ludwig  375 

Christoph,  Duke  of  Wurttemburg  199 

Chrysostomus  Neapolitanus  205 

Chytraeus,  N.  436 

Cicero  19,  34,  35,  39,  59,  60,  65,  81, 
87,  91-93,  99,  108-11,  113,  114, 
121,  122,  137,  141f.,  216,  237, 
280,  289,  291,  299,  414,  415,  459, 
477,  507,  521-30,  535-37,  583, 
585,  588,  589,  654-56; 

-Orator  110; 

—  De  oratore  111,  113 
Clare,  Etienne  de  226 
Clarence  168 
Claudian  4,  339 

Clavijero,  Francisco  Javier  617,  619 
Clavius,  Christophorus  577,  580 
Cleopatra  299,  301 


686 


INDEX 


Cleves,  Duchy  of  140 
Coccio,  A.  de  482 
Cochlaeus,  J.  12,  95,  511 
Colacius,  Matteus  523 
Colet,  John  396 
Colonna,  Crisostomo  555,  558 
Colonna,  Prospero  555,  556 
Colottius,  Angelus  48,  53 
Columella  108,  406 
Combe,  Thomas  317,  329; 

—  Theater  of  Fine  Devices  313 
Comenius,  J.  A.  216,  453 
Comes,  N.  141 

Compton  Carleton,  Thomas  579 
CondiUac  619 
Conradi,  N.  157 
Conradi,  Th.  v.  Philymnus,  Th. 
Conti,  Natale  100-102,  104-5 
Contile,  Luca  248,  249,  258 
Convivium  religiosum  278 
Copernicus,  Nicholas  221,  223,  232, 

578 
Cordus,  E.  307-13 
Cornaeus,  Melchior  573-80 
Comeille  267 
Cospus  36 
Coster,  F.  386 
Costers,  L.  J.  205 
Cowley,  Abraham  436 
Coxe,  H.  O.  29 
Cranevelt,  F.  511 
C  raster,  H.  29 
Cratander,  Andreas  195,  196 
Crecelius,  Wilhelm  28 
Crespin,  Jean  355 
Croke,  Richard  95,  139,  143 
Crusius,  M.  481-90 
Cujas,  Jacques  63,  140 
Cumont,  Franz  27,  29-31 
Curio,  C.  S.  482 
Cuspianus,  I.  39 
Cyprian,  St.  660 
Cyriaco  of  Ancona  119,  123,  124 

Dalberg,  J.  v.  8 
Damascene,  John  17-23; 

—  De  duabus  Christi  voluntatibus  17,  18, 
20-23; 

-Opera  17,  23 

Danhauser,  P.  9 

Dante  137,  421,  422,  477,  589,  668 


Dantiscus,  I.  145-51 

de  Corte  342 

Decembrio,  P.  C.  11,  479 

Defoe,  Daniel  348 

Dejob,  Charles  63,  65,  66 

Delia  Croce,  A.  482 

Delminio,  Giulio  Camillo  255 

Demosthenes  486 

Descartes,  R.  216,  226-28,  347,  619, 

636-38 
Deslions,  A.  390 
Despauterius  436,  517 
Dexicreon  101 

Diaz  de  Gamarra,  Juan  Benito  618 
Dilher,  J.  M.  392 
Dilthey,  W.  581 
Diodorus  Siculus  141 
Diogenes  Laertius  654 
Dolce,  L.  482 
Dollenkopf,  K.  126 
Domenichelli,  Francesco  425 
Donatus  25,  141,  143,  516,  517,  532 
Dorp,  M.  205,  505,  512,  563,  564, 

641,  643 
Dorsch,  Johann  Georg  579 
Dousa,  J.  203-8 

Doyle-Davidson,  W.  A.  G.  398,  400 
Droop,  F.  367 

Droste-Hulshoff,  A.  v.  383,  384 
Dryden,  John  543 
Dudycz,  Andre  355 
Duhrs,  B.  386 
Dujon,  Francois  107 
Duns  Scotus,575,  639,  640 
Durer,  A.  15,  188 
Dury,  John  236 

E.  K.  376 

Eck,  J.  564 

Einhard  11 

Elschenbroich,  A.  293 

Elyot,  Thomas  396 

Empedocles  403,  412,  414-16 

Engelhardt,  G.  390 

Ennius  175 

Enrique  de  Villena  522 

Epicurus  229,  404,  655 

Erasmus  36,  55,  56,  92,  94,  95,  101, 
124,  138f.,  141,  163,  167,  193, 
194,  196,  198-201,  277-87,  290, 
293,  295,  311,  312,  396,  400,  432, 


INDEX 


687 


469f.,  503-12,  563,  564,  641-49, 
656,  659,  661-66,  678,  680; 

—  Colloquies  659; 
-Enchiridion  211,  21 S,  280; 

—  Encomium  Moriae  258,  277-86; 

—  Precatio  dominica  663-65 
Eratosthenes  100 
Erlinghagen,  K.  386 
Ermenrich  137 

Este,  Ippolito  d'  64 

Estienne,  Henri  354,  437,  440,  441, 

444,  451,  452,  457 
Euripides,  657; 
-Alcestis  163,  164 
Eusibius  655 

Eyb,  Albertus  de  524,  527 
Eyck,  Jan  van  470f. 

Fabian,  B.  410,  419 

Fabri,  Manuel  617,  618 

Falcone,  Domizio  300 

Faludi,  F.  154 

Fazio,  Bartolommeo  471 

Feijoo,  Benito  Jeronimo  619,  620, 

623 
Ferdinand  VI  340,  349 
Ferdinand  (brother  of  Charles  V)  55, 

56 
Ferdinand  of  Calabria  556 
Ferdinand  of  Fiirstenberg  384 
Ferdinand  the  Catholic  553 
Ferrarius,  Julius  Aemilius  138 
Feyens,  Thomas  228,  229,  231 
Fiala,  J.  155 
Fichet,  Guillaume  525 
Ficino,  Marsilio  8,  119,  244,  254 
Filelfo,  F.  129 

Filetico  (Phileticas),  Martino  380 
Firdousi  261,  268 
Fischer,  Kuno  668 
Fisher,  J.  365 
Fisher,  R.  507,  509-11 
Fleming,  P.  389 
Fletcher,  John  E.  580 
Fliscus,  Stephanus  524 
Foley,  B.  365,  366 
Foligno,  N.  da  591 
Fonteius,  Marcus  57,  58 
Foster,  Jeffrey  65 
Fox,  Alistair  395,  400 
Fracastoro,  G.  409,  413-16,  419,  422, 


434,  435 
Fraccus,  N.  436 

Francis  I,  King  99,  146,  198,  491-500 
Francis  of  Assisi,  St.  285 
Franklin,  Benjamin  427,  432 
Frederick  II  (King  of  Denmark)  270, 

273 
Frederick  III  8,  12,  186 
Frederick  Barbarossa  178 
Frederick  Henry,  Prince  267 
Frederick  the  Wise  8,  310 
Frischlin,  J.  295 
Frischlin,  N.  124,  289-97,  482, 

531-39; 

—  Susanna  535; 

—Julius  Redivivus  536,  537 

Frith,  J.  512 

Froben,  Johannes  193,  195,  197,  507, 

641,  642,  646 
Fuchs,  Hans  Christoph  354 
Fulgentius  121,  137 
Fuscus,  P.  49 

Gagnay,  J.  72,  354 
Gaier,  U.  127 

Galateo,  Antonio  De  Ferrariis  551-53, 
555-59; 

—  De  educatione  551; 

—  De  nobilitate  553; 

—  De  situ  Japygiae  551 
Galileo  221-31,  577,  578,  580 
Gass,  W.  172 

Gassendi,  P.  221-31,  619,  626 
Gaultier,  Joseph  227 
Geldenhauer,  G.:  See  Noviomagus 
Gellius,  Aulus  101,  141,  412,  656, 

657 
Georg  Friedrich  v.  Brandenburg- 

Ansbach  129 
Georg  d.  Reiche  v.  Bayern-Landshut 

171 
George  of  Trebizond  523,  525 
Gerardus  de  Haderwijk  181 
Gercke,  A.  213 
Gerlo,  H.  W.  469f. 
Gessler,  Heinrich  523 
Ghiperti  261 

Gil,  Alexander,  Parerga  236 
Gilbert,  William  226; 

—  De  magnete  236 
Giles,  Peter  92-94 


688 


INDEX 


Gillis,  Pierre  469f.,  641 

Giraldi,  Lilio  Gregorio  100-103,  105, 

121 
Girardinus,  Bartholomaeus  138,  142 
Glareanus,  H.  L.  650 
Goclenius,  K.  511 
Goethe  212,  261,  411 
Gold,  H.  511 
Goldast,  M.  37 
Goldsmith,  Oliver  426 
Gonell,  William  659,  661 
Gonzaga  A.  386 

Gonzaga,  Elisabetta  300,  302,  649 
Goritz,  Johann,  Cardinal  300 
Goudin,  A.  580 
Gracian  y  Morales,  B.  594 
Grant,  Edward  580 
Grauius,  Henricus  18-21 
Grevin,  Jacques  64 
Grieninger,  J.  9 
Grocyn  95 
Gronbech,  V.  584 
Grosseteste,  Robert  18,  19,  21-23; 

—  transl.,  De  duabus  Christi  voluntatibus 
(Damascene)  17,  18 

Grotius,  Hugo  263-68 
Grynaeus,  J.J.  482 
Gryphius,  Ch.  385 
Gryphius,  S.  140,  141,  199 
Guarini,  Guarino  515 
Guarino  Veronese  8,  583 
Guarinus,  A.  47,  49,  52 
Guericke,  Otto  von  217,  577 
Guicciardini,  F.  582,  593,  594 
Guidotto  da  Bologna  522 
Gunther  V.  Pairis  9,  178 
Guthmiiller,  B.  120,  121 

Haffter,  H.  37 
Halapy,  K.  155,  156 
Hall,  Bishop  Joseph  376,  382 
Hammer,  W.  95 
Hannulik,  J.  K.  157,  158 
Hartmann,  Alfred  193,  681 
Has,  K.  12,  15 
Hastings,  Francis  356 
Hastings,  Henry  356 
Heidelberg  Passion  262 
Heinsius,  Daniel  143,  322,  330, 
541-49; 

—  Emblemata  amatoria  322 


Heliodorus  481-90 

Helmholtz,  H.  217 

Henke,  H.  Ph.  157 

Henrietta  Maria  239 

Henry  VII  38 

Henry  VIII  365,  369,  504,  505 

Herbenus,  M.  201 

Hermannus  Allemanus  523 

Hermes  Trismegistus  243 

Hervet,  Gentien  662,  666 

Herwagen,  J.  195,  199 

Hesiod  11,  34,  37,  38,  82,  403,  405, 

406,  416,  488 
Hess,  G.  127 
Hessus,  Eobanus  12,  71,  72,  289, 

312,  354,  375-82,  536 
Hill,  H.  C.  384 
Hillen,  Michael  (Antwerp  publisher) 

56 
Hobbes,  Th.  216 
Hoffman,  Friedrich,  Fundamenta  medic- 

inae  rationalis  systematicae  347 
Holbein,  Hans  195 
Holtzwart,  Mathias  317,  329; 
—  Emblematum  Tyrocinia  317,  318 
Holzl,  B.  35 
Homer  34,  35,  37,  38,  76,  82,  108, 

121,  141,  174,  206,  239,  277,  303, 

320,  429,  435,  483 
Hopper,  Marcus  18,  19 
Horace  3,  4,  8,  35,  38,  71,  108,  112, 

113,  125,  128,  129,  137,  141f., 

157-59,  185,  234,  235,  238,  301, 

318,  359,  412-14,  483,  484,  507, 

532; 
-Art  of  Poet  112,  236,  238; 
-Odes  73-78,  234,  235; 
-Satires  237,  238 
Hortensius,  L.  202,  203 
Hosschius,  S.  154,  390 
Howard,  Thomas,  of  Arundel  107, 

108 
Hrotsvita  of  Gandersheim  9,  292 
Hugo,  Herman  322 
Hummelberger,  M.  138f.,  141,  143 
Hurtadus  de  Mendoza,  P.  574,  579 
Hyrde,  Richard  659,  661,  662,  666 

Ignatius  Loyola  387-89 
Innocent  III  586 
Irenicus,  F.  12 


INDEX 


689 


Iriarte,  Juan  de  339-51; 
-De  matriti  sordibus  339-51 
Isengrin,  M.  195,  199 
Isidore  of  Seville  262,  268 
Isocrates  56,  139,  524 

Jacopone  da  Todi  383 
Jager,  G.  213 
Jahnke,  Richard  26,  29,  30 
James  I  (England)  321,  667; 

—  Basilikon  Doron  321 
James  VI  166,  355 
Jamot,  Frederic  354 
Janell,  W.  293 
Jantz,  H.  384 
Jaquemont,  Jean  357 
Jenny,  Beat  Rudolph  199 
Jerome,  72,  78,  79,  129,  130,  159, 

201,  262,  268,  286,  353,  470,  555, 

644 
Jersinus,  Janus  Dionysius  275,  517, 

519 
Joachimsen,  P.  174 
Jodelle,  Etienne  64 
Johanna,  Mother  84,  86 
Johannes  Secundus  205,  389 
John  of  Salisbury  137 
John  of  Saxony  311 
John  of  Jandhun  11 
John  the  Baptist  164 
Johnson,  Samuel  543 
Jonson,  Ben  100 
Jordanes  35 
Joseph  II  158 
Josephus,  Flavius  263,  268 
Joubert,  J.  582 
Juliana,  St.  167 
Julius  II  (Pope)  299,  430,  432,  552, 

553 
Junius,  Franciscus  107-15; 

—  De  pictura  ueterum,  107-15 
Junius,  H.  203-7 
Junkmann,  W.  383 
Justinian  675,  676,  678,  679 
Juvenal  4,  55,  65,  127,  129,  376,  507, 

656 

Kant,  I.  411 
Katherine,  St.  167 
Kempis,  Thomas  a  284 
Kepler,  Johannes  226,  230 


Kircher,  Athanasius  580 
Klotz,  Alfred  26,  28,  30,  31 
Kochanowski,  Jan  425,  431 
Koelhoff,  Johann  525 
Kohlmann,  Philipp  26-32 
Koricsanyi,  M.  156 
Kostka,  S.  386 
Kratz,  W.  384,  385 
Kraus,  A.  384 
Krause,  Carl  375,  376,  382 
Kwiatkiewicz,  J.  146 

La  Fontaine,  Jean  de  156,  543 
La  Rochefoucauld,  F.  594 
Labbe,  P.  Philippe,  S.  J.  436-67; 

—  Etymologies  des  mots  frangais  437, 
439,  441,  445,  448-51,  457 

Lactantius,  Caecilius  25 

Laetus,  Erasmus  Michaelius  269-71 

Lambin,  Denis  63 

Lamius,  J.  28 

Lancelot,  Claude  437-39,  443,  445, 

453,  455-58,  461 
Landino,  Cristoforo  244 
Landivar,  Rafael  617 
Lang,  M.  34-37 
Laodamia  302 
Latomus  166 
Lazar,  J.  158 
Le  Maistre,  Isaac  437-39,  443,  445, 

446,  458 
Le  Preux,  Frangois  358 
Le  Preux,  Jean  358 
Lebeau  263,  268 
Lebegue,  Raymond  64 
Lechner  386 
Lee,  Edward  312,  395 
Lee,  Joyce  (Leygh,  Joyeuce)  395 
Lefevre  d'Etaples,  J.  17,  18,  20, 

138f.,  643; 

-  De  fide  orthodoxa  17-21 
Leibniz  216,  451,  619,  625-34, 

636-40 
Leo  X  (Pope)  50-52,  277,  300,  301, 

425,  430,  436,  552,  553 
Leo  XIII  (Pope)  215 
Lessing,  G.  E.  307 
Licurgus  622,  623 
Ligurinus:  See  Gunther  v.  Pairis 
Lily,  William  436,  514 
Linacre,  Thomas  141,  518 


690 


INDEX 


Lindenborg,  F.  26 

Lipsius,  Justus  63,  65,  204 

Livy  34,  35,  99,  185,  341,  342,  344, 

656 
Locher,  Jakob  524,  527 
Locke,  John  609-16; 
-De  tolerantia  612-13,  613,  615 
Longinus  65 
Loschi,  A.  591 
Lotichius,  P.  160 

Louis  XIV,  King  439,  440,  458,  459 
Lucan  301,  411,  429 
Lucian  91,  92,  104,  139,  199,  400, 

505,  512,  592 
Lucretius  164,  404,  406,  410-13, 

415-17,  420,  421,  436 
Luke  (Evangelist)  329 
Luther,  Martin  95,  128,  269,  285, 

294,  310,  563-72 
Lycotas  301,  302 
Lysias  486 

MachiavelH,  N.  581,  592,  593 
Macrin  72,  77 
Macrobius  101,  141,  435 
Macropedius  261 
Maecenas  35,  77,  159 
Mago  Carthaginiensis  415 
Maier,  M.  124 
Maignan,  Emmanuel  580 
Majansius,  G.  55 
Mako,  P.  154 
Malebranche  636 
Mancinelh,  A.  524 
Manetti,  G.  586,  587 
Manilius  141,  185,  406,  420 
Mann,  Thomas  261,  262 
Mannich,  Johann  322,  329,  330; 
—  Sacra  emblemata  329 
Mantuanus,  Baptista  375-82 
Manutius,  Aldus  8,  515,  519,  523 
Manutius,  Paulus  63 
Margaret,  St.  167 
Maria  of  Portugal  555 
Marino,  G.  B.  425 
Marot,  Clement  353 
Martens,  D.  641 
Martial  156 
Martianus  Capella  121 
Masen,  J.  385 
Masures,  Louis  des  357 


Mathieu-Castellani,  Gisele  64 
Matunowiczowna,  L.  213 
Maturanzio,  F.  30,  34 
Maximilian  I  33,  34,  36,  39,  171-80, 

182,  183,  385 
Mazzoni,  J.  668; 

—  Difesa  della  Commedia  di  Dante  672, 
673 

Meander  95,  96 
Medici,  C.  de'  590 
Mela,  P.  11 

Melanchthon,  Philip  72,  189,  269-71, 
290,  293,  514-18,  533,  534; 

—  Grammatica  Latina  514-17 
Melinus,  Petrus  45,  46 
Mellanges,  Simon  141,  142 
Menander  533 
Mersenne,  Marvin  227,  231 
Merula,  Giorgio  138f.,  142f. 
Metsys,  Q.  469f. 

Meyer,  W.  3 

Micyllus,  J.  72,  514 

Mikes,  A.  159 

Miltiades  238 

Milton,  John  166,  233,  236-39,  301, 

377,  547,  549 
Mindenus,  J.  202 
Minuziano,  M.  197 
Modoinus  377 
Moesch,  L.  155 
Moliere  146 
Molinet,  Jean  524 
Moller,  H.  356 
Mombritus,  B.  25 
Montaigne,  Michel  de  63,  64,  140, 

581,  582,  588,  594 
Montano,  Benito  Arias  354 
Montanus,  P.  417 
Montjoy  507,  511 
Montlyard,  Jean  de  102 
Moravus,  A.  188 
More,  A.  508 
More,  Crescae  396 
More,  St.  Thomas  55,  91f.,  277,  286, 

365-74,  395-400,  469f.,  503-12, 

563-72,  641-43,  646,  647,  649, 

656,  659,  660,  661,  663; 
-Utopia  9 If.,  286 
Morel  163 
Morellus,  D.  503 
Morin,  Jean-Baptiste  227,  228,  231 


INDEX 


691 


Morton,  John  Cardinal  93,  94 

Moschus  301 

Moses  Maimonides  264,  635 

Muller,  I.  V.  213 

Miinzer,  H.  14 

Muret,  Marc-Antoine  de  63-69 

Musius  72 

Muthsam,  F.  X.  154 

Mutianus,  C.  143,  312 

Mylius,  Hermann  233-39 

Mythographi  Vatican!  121 

Naogeorgius,  Th.  127-36 

Navagero,  A.  383,  413,  415,  416 

Navarro,  Bernabe  622,  623 

Neckam,  A.  119,  121 

Nemeti,  P.  159 

Nepos  656 

Nero  377 

Neuhausen,  K.  A.  117-26 

Newton,  Isaac  224,  619,  630,  633 

Nicander  404,  416 

Nicholas  of  Bibera  1 1 

Nicholas  of  Cusa  9 

Nicholas  of  Lyra  182 

Nietzsche,  F.  582 

Nivenius,  J.  202 

Nonius  656 

Norefia,  C.  G.  655 

Noviomagus,  G.  201,  203,  204 

Numerianus  102 

Numicius  125 

Nutzel,  G.  10 

Octavian  39 

Ohly,  F.  33,  188 

Oliverus,  W.  183,  184 

Oporino,  J.  127 

Oppianos  406 

Opsopoeus,  V.  481,  484 

Oresme,  N.  224 

Origen  262,  268,  278,  680 

Osiander,  Andreas  221,  230 

Otto  the  Great  309 

Ovid  31,  35,  37,  78,  84,  99,  121, 
122,  137f.,  141f.,  153-56,  159,  207, 
227,  301-3,  387-90,  412,  436,  507 

Owen,  J.  154,  156 

Oxenstierna,  Axel  267 

Pachtler,  G.  M.  580 


Pachymeres,  G.  486 
Paganinis,  Jacobus  de  25 
Pagnini,  Santes  354 
Paintner,  M.  153 
Palearius,  A.  436 
Palingenius,  M.  419,  422 
Parmenides  638,  640 
Parr,  Catharine  659 
Parrhasius,  lanus  48,  53 
Parthenius,  Antonius  49,  53 
Pascal,  Blaise  580,  597-608; 
-Pensees  597-99 
Pasor,  Georges  448-50,  453; 

—  Etyma  nominum  propriorum  .  .  . 
448-49 

Patrizi,  Francesco  da  Cherso  243-59, 

670; 
-Delia  Poetica  243,  253-57; 

—  Dialoghi  della  Historia  245-47; 
-Dialoghi  della  Retorica  245,  246, 

248-53; 

—  Discorso  della  diveristd  de' furori  poetici 
244; 

—  Discussiones  peripateticae  252,  254; 

—  Lettura  sopra  .  .  .  Petrarca  245 
Paul  the  Deacon  656 

Paul,  St.  85,  129,  278,  283,  285,  398, 

399,  645,  680 
Peacham,  Henry  321,  322,  330; 
-Minerva  Britanna  321,  322 
Peczely,  J.  159 
Peiresc,  Nicolas-Claude  Fabri  de  226, 

231 
Pererius,  Benedictus  579 
Perez  Marchand,  Monelisa  619,  623 
Perion,  Joachim  18-21,  23,  437,  442, 

444,  451,  453; 

—  transl.,  De  duabus  Christi  voluntatibus 
(Damascene)  18 

Perkins,  William  321,  330 

Perotti,  N.  141,  513,  515,  518,  519 

Perriere,  Guillaume  de  la  317 

Persius  129,  532,  538 

Petrarch  8,  11,  119,  120-22,  138, 

142,  201,  322,  377,  471,  582,  583, 

585,  587-90,  592 
Peurbach,  G.  188 
Peutinger,  K.  35,  36 
Peypus,  A.  14 
Phidias  103 
Phillips,  John  236-38 


692 


INDEX 


Philipp  I  38 

Philipp  II  203 

Philo  Judaeus  263,  264 

Philonenko,  M.  268 

Philostratos  the  Younger  471 

Philymnus,  Th.  311,  312 

Phokylides  416 

Photius  481 

Picard,  Jean  451; 

—  De  prisca  Celtopaedia  45 1 
Piccolomini,  Aeneas  Sylvius  8,  11, 

187-89,  202,  524 
Piccolomineus,  Franciscus  580 
Pico  della  Mirandola,  Gianfrancesco 

38,  171,  178 
Pico  della  Mirandola,  Giovanni  178, 

244,  395-400 
Pico,  Ludovico,  Count  of  Mirandola 

299 
Pictor,  Georgius  100,  102,  104,  105 
Pindar  35 

Pirckheimer,  C.  9,  659 
Pirckheimer,  W.  9,  36,  659 
Placidus,  Lactantius  25-32 
Plantin,  C.  71,  144 
Plato  65,  91,  93,  110,  111,  114,  181, 

187,  189,  243,  246,  267,  285,  435, 

459,  584,  629,  633,  634,  638,  640, 

668,  679,  680 
Plautus  25,  36,  292,  507,  656; 
-Amphitruo  237,  238 
Pliny  (Elder)  46,  47 
Pliny  11,  37,  103,  141,  299,  318,  320, 

486,  654,  656 
Plotinus  243,  655 
Plutarch  103,  109,  127,  139,  301, 

341,  342,  533,  539,  656; 
—Moralia  539; 

—  Sayings  of  Spartans  237-38 
Poelmann:  See  Pulmann 
Poggio  Bracciolini  587,  590-92 
Poliziano,  Angelo  49,  51,  53,  137, 

142,  144,  303,  417 
Pompey  657 

Pomponazzi,  Pietro  515,  680,  681 
Pomponio  Leto  8 
Pontano,  G.  G.  48-49,  53,  409,  412, 

413,  419-22 
Pontano,  Giovanni  389,  552,  556,  557 
Pontoppidan,  Eric  269,  274 
Pope,  Alexander  425,  432 


Pornbacher,  H.  384 

Porphyry  564 

Postel,  G.  81-89,  453 

Pound,  Ezra  396,  397,  400 

Prat,  Guillaume  du  81 

Pratensis,  J.  271,  275 

Praxiteles  299 

Priscian  141,  144,  291,  293,  515 

Procopius  339 

Proclus  243 

Propertius  156,  300,  301,  313; 

—  Carmina  300 
Protesilaus  302 
Prudentius  71,  266,  359 
Psellus  81 
Pseudo-Aristotle  81 
Pseudo-Quintilian  56 
Ptolemy  11,  223,  230 
Puccius,  Franciscus  47-48,  53 
Pulmann,  Theodorus  (Poelmann)  140, 

144 
Puttenham,  George  376-78,  382; 
—Arte  of  English  Poesy  377,  378 
Puy,  Pierre  du  225 
Pythagoras  181,  187,  416 

Quarengiis,  Petrus  de  25 
Quarles,  Francis  322 
Quevedo  y  Villegas,  F.  G.  594 
Quintilian  55,  92,  108,  113,  114,  138, 
522,  524-27,  532,  656; 

—  Institutio  oratoriae  113,  114 

Rabelais  99,  499 

Rade,  Gillis  van  den  357 

Rader,  M.  297 

Radig,  S.  J.  213 

Ramus,  Peter  253,  515 

Raphael  299,  302 

Raynal  619 

Regiomontanus,  J.  184-88 

Regius,  R.  523-24 

Reiderer,  F.  523 

Rembrandt  261 

Reuchlin,  J.  36,  178 

Reusner,  Nicholas  316,  329; 

-Emblemata  316,  317 

Rhenanus,  Beatus  139,  641,  642 

Rhodiginus,  Caelius  99-105 

Riccioli,  J.  B.  576,  580 

Rienzo,  Cola  di  1 1 


INDEX 


693 


Rihel,  Josiah  354 

Ripa,  Cesare  321 

Ripa,  Franciscus  197 

Rodriguez  de  Montalvo,  G.  488 

Roethe,  G.  293,  294 

Rogers,  Daniel  163 

Ronsard,  P.  de  63,  64,  68,  nn.  4-7 

Roper,  Margaret  More  659-66; 

—A  Deuout  Treatise  661-65 

Roper,  William  660,  661 

Rosenpliit,  H.  11,  12 

Rowland,  John  236,  237 

Rubens  114 

Rudolf  II  533 

Rufus,  Mutian  379 

Rupert  V.  d.  Pfalz  171-73,  179 

Sabatini,  Francesco  348,  350 

Sachs,  H.  12 

Sadoleto,  J.  (Cardinal)  199 

Sainte-Marthe,  Scevole  de  357 

Salas  383 

Sallust  56,  202,  656 

Salomon,  J.  140 

Salutati,  C.  138 

Sambucus,  J.  123,  318,  319,  329, 

482; 
-Emblemata  318-20 
Sander,  N.  368 
Sannazaro,  J.  48,  304,  313,  383,  384, 

386,  552,  556,  558; 
-El.  1.13  48-49 
Sansovino,  A.  300 
Santritter,  J.  L.  188 
Sarbievius,  M.  C.  154 
Sattler,  V.  386 
Savellius  141 
Savonarola,  M.  11 
Sbrulius,  R.  379 
Scaliger,  Julius  Caesar  63,  141,  300, 

409,  416,  426,  431,  445,  548-49; 
-Poetices  300 

Scaliger,  Joseph  63,  137  ff. 
Scatassi,  R.  41 
Schade,  R.  E.  293 
Schaffer,  P.  37 
Schedel,  H.  9-11,  177 
Scheiner,  C.  578,  580 
Schenkle,  Karl  141,  144 
Schickard,  Wilhelm  226 
Schluter,  Ch.  B.  383,  384 


Schmitz,  Wilhelm  27 

Schonaeus,  C.  293 

Schonborn,  Johann  Phillip  von  573, 

580 
Schoner,  J.  188 
Schoonhovius,  Florentius  320,  321, 

330; 

-  Emblemata  320 
Schott,  Caspar  580 
Schreiber,  Johann  580 
Schreyer,  S.  9,  10,  14 
Schubert,  F.  174 
Schiirer,  M.  37 
Schwarz,  Ch.  386,  389 
Scipio  267 

Scotus,  Octavius  25 
Seibertz,  Johann  Suibert  79 
Seneca  3,  9,  65,  127,  141,  164,  168, 

185,  265,  266,  282,  459,  589,  655, 

657 
Seneca  Rhetor  656 
Serassi,  Pierantonio  300 
Servius  25,  99,  377,  410 
Sforza,  Bona  555,  556 
Sforza,  Duke  Francesco  199 
Shakespeare,  William  168,  317,  366, 

376,  396,  546 
Shepherd,  Geoffrey  670 
Siber,  Adam  354 
Siberchs,  J.  507 
Sigismund  I  145-47 
Silius  656 
Snoy,  Reynier  354 
Socinus,  F.  597-608; 

—  De  auctoritate  Sacrae  Scripturae  597-99, 
603 

Socrates  123,  680 
Solon  416 

Sommervogel,  C.  386,  579 
Sozzini,  Lelio  199 
Spalatin,  G.  647 
Spangeburg  72 
Spangenberg,  Johann  354 
Spenser,  Edmund  376,  377 
Sperantius,  S.  36 
Speroni,  Sperone  244 
Spiegel,  J.  36,  37,  171-80 
Spinoza,  B.  216,  411 
Stabius,  J.  36 
Stackelberg,  J.  v.  582 
Stammler,  W.  216 


694 


INDEX 


Stapleton,  Thomas  368,  510,  660,  666 

Statius  4,  25-32,  37; 

-Silvae  234,  236 

Staverton,  Frances  661 

Stengel,  G.  297 

Stigliani,  Tommaso  339,  342,  343 

Stoer,  Jacob  357 

Storge  167,  168 

Stroh,  F.  215 

Strozzi,  T.  V.  129 

Sturm,  J.  293,  482 

Sturm,  L.  183 

Sturz,  G.  308,  309 

Stiirzel,  C.  182 

Suarez,  Franciscus  574,  575,  579 

Suetonius  141,  202,  204 

Sulla,  Lucius  Cornelius  55,  57,  58 

Sulpitius,  Johannes  515,  519 

Summonte,  Pietro  48,  53 

Susius,  N.  390 

Swift,  Jonathan  376 

Symmachus  166 

Szarota,  E.  M.  384 

Tacitus  9,  11,  65,  102,  202,  204,  309, 

535; 
-Annales  239 
Tarasios  481 
Tardif,  Guillaume  525 
Teleki,  M.  159 
Telesio,  Bernardino  679 
Terence  25,  36,  141,  164,  290-93, 

484,  507,  532-34,  656 
Tertullian  262,  268 
Theocritus  35,  82,  375-82 
Theodore  of  Gaza  524 
Theognis  416 
Theophrastus  415 
Thomas,  P.  27,  29 
Thurneisser,  L.  184 
Tibullus  154,  159,  387 
Tilney,  E.  366 
Tittelmans,  Frans  354 
Tolophus,  J.  9 
Torricelli,  Evangelista  577 
Toscano,  G.  M.  354 
Traversagnus,  Gullielmus  525-27 
Trebizond  17 

Trinquet,  Roger  63,  64,  66 
Trithemius,  J.  9,  141 
Tucher,  S.  9 


Turnebe,  A.  63,  140f.,  442 
Tyndale,  W.  650 
Tyrtaius  416 

Udall,  Nicholas  659,  662,  663,  665, 
666; 

—  Paraphrase  of  Erasmus  659,  662 
Udo  of  Magdeburg  387 
Ugoleto,  Angelo  138 
Ugoleto,  Taddeo  138f.,  143 
Ulpian  (Domitius  Ulpianus)  675,  676 
Ulrich,  Duke  of  Wurttemburg  199 

Vadian,  J.  36-38,  171 

Vaganay,  Hugues  64,  361 

Valentinus  141 

Valeriano,  Pierio  45-53; 

-De  litteratorum  infelicitate  51,  52 

Valla,  Lorenzo  141,  416,  513,  515, 
524,  556,  643-47,  678 

Valois,  Louis  Emmanuel  de  225 

Varga,  L.  157 

Varro  415,  656 

Vascosan,  M.  163 

Vatable,  Frangois  81,  354 

VautroUier,  Thomas  163,  357 

Vedel,  Anders  Soerensen  270,  272, 
275 

Veiras,  F.  385 

Velius,  C.  U.  36 

Vergil  8,  34,  36-39,  73,  78,  81-83, 
85-88,  121,  137,  141,  154,  171-80, 
202,  270,  290,  300,  301,  309, 
375-82,  406,  410,  412-16,  420, 
422,  428,  429,  435f.,  483,  507, 
524,  531; 

-Aeneid  233,  234,  289,  302; 

-Georgics  1.145f.,  73; 

-Eclogue  2  234,  235 

Vesalius,  Andreas  576 

Vianey,  Joseph  64 

Vicentino,  Lodovico:  See  Arrighi 

Victorinus  522,  527,  528n,  530n 

Vida,  M.  G.  117,  409,  413,  419,  421, 
425-32,  436; 

—Ars  poetica  430,  431; 

—De  rei  publicae  dignitate  .  .  .  425-27; 

—  Scacchia  ludus  429 
Vienken,  H.  J.  125 
Vignon,  Eustache  356 
Villasenor,  Enrique  620,  621,  623 


INDEX 


Villon,  Antoine  226 

Vincent,  J.  482 

Vinet,  Elie  139ff. 

Virgil:  See  Vergil 

Viri  obscuri  295 

Visconti,  Ambrosio  197 

Vives,  Juan  Luis  55-61,  141,  564, 

653-59,  665,  666 
Volckamer,  P.  10 
Vollenhoven,  C.  van  268 
Vondel  261,  262,  267,  268 
Vorosmartys,  M.  158 
Vossius,  G.  107,  264,  268,  445,  547, 

549 


Waard,  Comelis  de  580 

Waleff,  Baron  (Blaise-Henri  de  Corte) 

339,  344,  347 
Wallius,  J.  154 
Warschewicki,  St.  481 
Webbe,  Wiliam  376,  382 
Weckherlin,  Georg  Rudolph  233-36, 

240 
Weinreich,  O.  129 
Weller,  H.  215 


695 


Werminghoff,  A  10 

Westermayer,  G.  384 

Whitmore,  P.  J.  S.  580 

Whitney,  G.  318,  329; 

—A  Choice  of  Emblemes  318 

Widebram,  Friedrich  354 

Wiesflecker,  H.  33 

William  of  Saona:  See  Traversagnus 

Wimpfeling,  Jacob  376 

Winter,  Robert  56 

Winterburger,  J.  14 

Woestisne,  Paul  van  de  26,  30-32 

Wojtkowski,  A.  145 

Wolf,  F.  A.  212 

Wolf,  Thomas  Jr.  376,  382 

Wolff,  Ch.  158,  216 

Wolfgang  of  Bavaria  171,  173 

Worm,  Ole  271,  275 

Xenocrates  81 


Zanis,  Bartholomaeus  25 
Zasius,  Ulrich  193,  194 
Zinzerling,  J.  385 
Zwinger,  Jakob  361 


mnts 


mG^ieaal  8c  r^enaissance  tGXts  8c  stadfes 

is  the  publishing  program  of  the 

Center  for  Medieval  and  Early  Renaissance  Studies 

State  University  of  New  York  at  Binghamton. 

mnts  emphasizes  books  that  are  needed  — 
texts,  translations,  and  major  research  tools. 

mflts  aims  to  publish  the  highest  quality  scholarship 
in  attractive  and  durable  format  at  modest  cost.